Social Innovation in Sport 3030637646, 9783030637644

Citation preview

Social Innovation in Sport Edited by Anne Tjønndal

Social Innovation in Sport

Anne Tjønndal Editor

Social Innovation in Sport

Editor Anne Tjønndal Faculty of Social Sciences Nord University Bodø, Norway

ISBN 978-3-030-63764-4 ISBN 978-3-030-63765-1 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63765-1 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Cover credit: peepo This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

Acknowledgments

First and foremost, I thank the 23 chapter authors for contributing to this book with their empirical research and theoretical analyses of social innovation in sport. I would also like to express my thanks to the Leadership and Innovation Section at the Faculty of Social Sciences at Nord University for funding a thorough language revision of all the chapters included in the book. Furthermore, I would like to thank Sue Glover Frykman at Word-stugan for her amazing work proof reading and language editing the book. Finally, many thanks to publisher Sharla Plant at the Sociology and Social Policy section at Palgrave Macmillan for supporting me and sticking with me in the two years it took to finalize “Social Innovation in Sport.”

v

Introduction

There are many drivers for innovation in sport. Elite sport, in particular, is often hailed as a champion of technological innovation; something advanced in sports equipment that provide new and more accurate ways of tracking athletic performance has demonstrated time after time (Balmer, Pleasence, & Nevill, 2012; Magdalinski, 2008; Tamburrini, 2016). A recent example is the implementation of the video assistant referee (VAR) technology in elite football. The technological innovations of elite sport are often developed for performance enhancement purposes; they are seldom developed to solve complex social issues in sport. Some of the technological innovations in elite sport might still have alternative uses in grassroots sports that could be considered socially innovative. Social innovations in sport, that is, innovations aimed at solving social issues in sporting contexts, often have their origin from local grassroots sports, such as youth at risk developing grassroots parkour in the Gaza strip (Thorpe & Ahmad, 2015) or the development of new, more gender inclusive sporting activities such as quidditch (Segrave, 2015). Elite or grassroots sport is teeming with innovation. Scholarly literature on innovation in sport is dominated by research with an empirical focus directed toward business, marketing, management and entrepreneurial ventures (Ratten, 2016, 2017; Skinner, Smith, Swanson, 2018; Tjønndal, 2017). This book seeks to contribute to the international literature on innovation in sport by exploring innovations in

vii

viii

INTRODUCTION

sport that are aimed at solving social issues—in other words, social innovations (Willumsen, Sirnes, Ødegård, 2015). Hence, the ambition of this book is to explore social innovation in sport, i.e., cases in which innovation and entrepreneurship are used as strategies to make sport more widely accessible, inclusive and equal. The book covers social innovation in sport theoretically from various perspectives on innovation and entrepreneurship and empirically through case studies from different sports in different geographical contexts. In bringing together the theoretical explorations and empirical studies provided by the contributing authors about how social innovation shapes the development of sport today, the book offers some unique perspectives for scholars, students and practitioners interested in sport development, technology, digitalization and sport innovation. To achieve this ambition, I have enlisted the help of sport scholars from Europe, North America and Australia to provide a collection of geographically diverse empirical studies on how social innovation contributes to the emergence of new and alternative sports and the creation of imaginative and novel ways of organizing, playing and governing sport in different socio-geographical contexts. While the research included in the chapters in this book contribute to new knowledge on social innovation in sport, the content is heavily Eurocentric and certainly with a global north orientation. This is probably the most significant limitation of the anthology as a whole. My motivation for writing a book about social innovation in sport developed during my years as a doctoral student in sociology at Nord University. I wrote my Ph.D. thesis on social innovation in Norwegian sports organizations. I explored empirical cases in which sports organizations used digital technology or developed new ideas about how to organize, govern and play sport in order make their activities more socially inclusive, democratic and equal. This research aimed to understand how (and whether) social innovation was a fruitful strategy for sports organizations to achieve the goal of fitting sport for a more socially inclusive future (e.g., Tjønndal 2016a; 2016b, 2017, 2018a, 2018b, 2018c, 2018d, 2019). Studying the different ways in which innovation can spur social change in sport has led me to more questions than answers. For instance, how do innovation and technology impact the emergence of new and more inclusive sports? Can social innovation lead to real and lasting social change in sport? How does the emergence of new and alternative sports, innovations and entrepreneurship challenge us to rethink

INTRODUCTION

ix

what sport is? Is social innovation simply a buzzword for sport policymakers, or is it a viable strategy for practitioners seeking to transform sports organizations so that they become more inclusive? How can digital technology be utilized to bring about such changes in sport? It is my aspiration that the content of this book will make a modest contribution to a continued scholarly exploration of such questions related to the broader topic of social innovation in sport.

The Content and Structure of the Book In addition to this introduction and a concluding chapter, the anthology is structured in four parts: (1) Theoretical Perspectives on Social Innovation in Sport, (2) Sport and Social Innovation in Practice, (3) Innovations that Challenge Definitions of Sport and (4) Gender and Social Innovation in Sport. Part I, Theoretical Perspectives on Social Innovation in Sport, consists of Chapters 1–4. Chapter 1 outlines the theoretical perspectives on innovation and social innovation in sport and demonstrates the difference between sport innovation more generally and social innovation in sport in particular by using two technological sport innovations as examples: the polyurethane swimsuit and the RaceRunner bike. Chapter 2 is a theoretical chapter written by Mikhail Kosmynin and Elisabet Carine Ljunggren in which the authors sketch out and describe the differences between older, more traditional analytical perspectives on innovation and entrepreneurship and the emerging theories of social innovation and social entrepreneurship, with the aim of investigating if such theories are fruitful for sport studies. In Chapter 3, Katarina Schenker, Tomas Peterson and Daniel Bjärsholm connect social innovation and social entrepreneurship to sport using empirical examples from Swedish sport. Chapter 4, written by Stefan Holmlid, David Ekholm and Magnus Dahlstedt, continues the exploration of social innovation in sport by examining two sports-based interventions of Midnight Football (MF) as a way of promoting social inclusion. The authors investigate these social innovations by focusing on how the interventions are diffused and infrastructured in different local contexts. They direct their attention to the conditions and processes of the scaling elements of interventions and distinguish between practice, program and the preconditions of diffusion. Part II, Sport and Social Innovation in Practice, consists of Chapters 5– 7 and begins with Charlotte Van Tuyckom’s creatively entitled chapter,

x

INTRODUCTION

“We app to move,” which is a case study of user involvement in the development of a digital platform to support self-organized sporting activities in Bruges, Belgium. Chapter 6, by Maja Nilssen and Anne Tjønndal, studies five examples of social innovation in the Norwegian urban development project “Smart Bodø,” which connects technology, innovation and sport to urban planning aimed at improving citizens’ quality of life. Chapter 7, by Selçuk Açıkgöza, Reinhard Haudenhuyse and Cem Tınazc, explores a socially innovative youth sport project conducted by a local NGO and public sport institution in Turkey. Their chapter utilizes a social inclusion youth sport project in a challenging organizational setting in order to describe innovative and alternative ways of improving the operations and capacities of sports organizations in other geographical contexts facing similar social and organizational challenges. Part III, Innovations that Challenge Definitions of Sport, is made up of Chapters 8–10. In Chapter 8, Anne Tjønndal & Mads Skauge explore the expansion of Esports in Norway by highlighting three developments that have been central to the rise of virtually played Esports in that country: (1) the introduction of a professional FIFA league, (2) the inclusion of Esports in secondary school sports programs and (3) the emergence of Esports teams in organized sports clubs. In Chapter 9, Verena Lenneis and Anne Tjønndal describe how footbag freestyle represents a socially innovative alternative to more traditional organized competitive sport and to other, more commercialized lifestyle sports. Finally, Chapter 10, written by Christina Gipson, Hannah Bennett, Nancy Malcom and Alexandra Trahan, is a case study of the development and diffusion of the fitness sport CrossFit in the US and considers the potential for social innovation through the development of new fitness sports. Part IV, Gender and Social Innovation in Sport, starts with Chapter 11 in which Jeffrey O. Segrave analyses how quidditch challenges the dominant gender binary way of organizing and playing sport. He looks at the ways in which quidditch, as an alternative new sport, challenges the status quo and has the potential to redefine sport so that it becomes more socially inclusive. In Chapter 12, Adele Pavlidis highlights how the revived and renewed version of roller derby represents an anomaly in modern sports by being one of the very few competitive full contact sports to be primarily played and organized by women. In Chapter 13, Nancy L. Malcom, Christina Gipson, Kristen S. Pirie and Rachel Miller Wood build on the exploration of social innovation in alternative sports developed by

INTRODUCTION

xi

women in their study of STUNT cheer. Using the Quinnipiac competitive cheer team as a case, the authors explore the increasing regulation and sportification of STUNT Cheer in North America. Finally, Chapter 14 concludes the book by providing final reflections on the implications for future research on social innovation in sport. Anne Tjønndal

References Balmer, N., Pleasence, P., & Nevill, A. (2012). Evolution and revolution: Gauging the impact of technological and technical innovation on Olympic performance. Journal of Sports Sciences, 30, 1075–1083. https://doi.org/10. 1080/02640414.2011.587018. Magdalinski, T. (2008). Sport, technology and the body. London: Routledge. Ratten, V. (2016). Sport innovation management: Towards a research agenda. Innovation Policy Management and Practice, 18(3), 238–250. Ratten, V. (2017). Sports innovation management. London: Routledge. Segrave, J. O. (2015). Challenging the gender binary: The fictive and real world of quidditch. Sport in Society: Cultures, Commerce, Media, Politics. http://dx. doi.org/10.1080/17430437.2015.1067783. Skinner, J., Smith, Aaron, C. T. & Swanson, S. (2018). Fostering innovative cultures in sport—Leadership, innovation and change. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Tamburrini, C. (2016). Genetic technology and sport. London: Routledge. Thorpe, H., & Ahmad, N. (2015). Youth, action sports and political agency in the Middle East: Lessons from a grassroots parkour group in Gaza. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 5(6), 678–704. Tjønndal, A. (2016a). Innovation for social inclusion in sport. In V. Ratten & J. Ferreira (Eds.), Sport entrepreneurship and innovation. London: Routledge. Tjønndal, A. (2016b). Sport, innovation and strategic management: A systematic literature review. Brazilian Business Review, 13(Special Issue), 38–56. Tjønndal, A. (2017). ‘I don’t think they realise how good we are’: Innovation, inclusion and exclusion in women’s Olympic boxing. International Review for the Sociology of Sport. https://doi.org/10.1177/1012690217715642. Tjønndal, A. (2018a). Vilje til inkludering—studier av innovasjon for sosial inkludering i idrett [Intention to include: Studies of innovation for social inclusion in sport] (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Bodø, Norway: Nord University.

xii

INTRODUCTION

Tjønndal, A. (2018b). Idrett, innovasjon og sosial inkludering: Fremveksten av Mixed Martial Arts i Norge [Sport, innovation and social inclusion: The emergence of mixed martial arts in Norway]. Scandinavian Sport Studies Forum, 9, 1–24. Tjønndal, A. (2018c). Sport innovation: Developing a typology. European Journal for Sport and Society, 15(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/161 38171.2017.1421504. Tjønndal, A. (2018d). Collaborative innovation: A viable strategy to solve complex transformational social issues in sport? In V. Ratten & P. Jones (Eds.), Transformational entrepreneurship. London: Routledge. Tjønndal, A. (2019). Jenter på brett—Jenteskate som endringsprosess og alternativ til organisert Ungdomsidrett [Girls on boards—Girl skate as an alternative to organized youth sport]. Tidsskrift for ungdomsforskning, Årgang 2018 (2), 79–106. Willumsen, E., Sirnes, T. & Ødegård, A. (2015). Innovasjon innen helse og velferd–sosial innovasjon. In E. Willumsen & A. Ødegård (Eds.), Sosial Innovasjon—fra politikk til tjenesteutvikling. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.

Contents

Part I Theoretical Perspectives on Social Innovation in Sport 1

2

3

Social Innovation in Sport: An Introduction to the Theory Anne Tjønndal Social Innovation and Social Entrepreneurship: Useful Theories for Sport? Mikhail Kosmynin and Elisabet Carine Ljunggren Social Innovations and Social Entrepreneurship in Sport Katarina Schenker, Tomas Peterson, and Daniel Bjärsholm

3

19

37

Part II Sport and Social Innovation in Practice 4

5

Practice Occludes Diffusion: Scaling Sport-Based Social Innovations Stefan Holmlid, David Ekholm, and Magnus Dahlstedt ‘We App to Move’—A Co-Created Digital Platform to Support Self-Organized Sporting Activities for Socially Vulnerable Youth in Bruges Charlotte Van Tuyckom

57

79

xiii

xiv

CONTENTS

6

Social Innovation, Sport and Urban Planning Maja Nilssen and Anne Tjønndal

7

Social Innovation and Challenges in Youth-Based Sport Practices: An Analysis of State-Led Programs Selçuk Açıkgöz, Reinhard Haudenhuyse, and Cem Tınaz

Part III 8

9

10

12

13

113

Innovations that Challenge Definitions of Sport

Social Innovation and Virtual Sport: A Case of Esports in Norway Anne Tjønndal and Mads Skauge

135

Footbag Freestyle: Innovation in the Organization and Practice of Sport Verena Lenneis and Anne Tjønndal

169

Social Innovation and Fitness Sports: A Case of the CrossFit Movement in North America Christina Gipson, Hannah Bennett, Nancy Malcom, and Alexandra Trahan

Part IV 11

95

189

Gender and Social Innovation in Sport

The Wonderful World of Quidditch: An Innovative Model of Gender Inclusivity Jeffrey O. Segrave

209

“Introducing” Roller Derby: An Old Sport Made New and Innovations in Gender Policies Adele Pavlidis

227

The Creation of Stunt Cheer: A Story of Innovation, Cheerleading and Gender Politics of Sport Nancy L. Malcom, Christina Gipson, Kristen S. Pirie, and Rachel Miller Wood

245

CONTENTS

Part V 14

Conclusion

Social Innovation in Sport: Implications and Directions for Research Anne Tjønndal

Index

xv

267

281

Notes on Contributors

Selçuk Açıkgöz holds a Ph.D. in Physical Education and Sport from Vrije Universiteit Brussel and Marmara University, Istanbul. Selçuk currently works in the Trakya University, Kırkpınar School of Physical Education and Sport. His research interests are sport-for-development, social policy, discrimination and social inclusion. Hannah Bennett is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Kinesiology at Augusta University with an educational background focused in sport, exercise and performance psychology. Her research lines examine social justice and diversity within sport and performance psychology and physical education, and also psychological dispositions of CrossFit athletes. In addition to her research, she continues mental skills consulting with athletes and exercisers in the surrounding areas. Daniel Bjärsholm is a Senior Lecturer in Sports Science at Linnaeus University. His research interest primarily concerns social entrepreneurship in sport. His other research interests include social responsibility in sport, sport policy and sport pedagogy. Magnus Dahlstedt is Professor in Social Work at Linköping University, Sweden. His research interests include citizenship, marketization of welfare, critical social work and civil society. He is currently conducting research on youth in urban peripheries, sport as a means of social inclusion and adult education targeting newly arrived refugees.

xvii

xviii

NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS

David Ekholm is a Lecturer and Researcher at Linköping University. His main research interests are in the sociology of social work and social policy. Here, he has a particular focus on youth interventions aiming for social inclusion and utilized by means of sport and leisure activities. Ekholm’s research is characterized by critical perspectives on contemporary social policy transformations. Christina Gipson is an Assistant Professor of Sport Management at Georgia Southern University. Her research examines CrossFit from various perspectives, such as impacts on under-researched populations, use of CrossFit as an intervention and risk management. She is an avid CrossFitter, Certified CrossFit Trainer and chair of a non-profit organization that offers CrossFit to underserved youth. Reinhard Haudenhuyse holds a Ph.D. in Sport and Kinesitherapy. His work focuses on sport, leisure, social in- and exclusion and social pedagogy Stefan Holmlid is Professor in Design at Linköping University. His research focuses on how design works and changes when performed in service context, especially in public sector contexts and policy contexts. He is currently performing research on design for welfare under nomadic conditions. Mikhail Kosmynin works as a Ph.D. candidate at the Faculty of Social Sciences, Nord University, Norway. His research interests range across several key areas within social entrepreneurship, including social entrepreneuring, collaboration in social entrepreneurship, social and impact investment. Verena Lenneis is a Sports Sociologist and works as an Assistant Professor at Aalborg University, Denmark. Her research interests include gender and sports, ethnic minorities’ sports participation and lifestyle sports. She started to play footbag freestyle in Vienna, Austria, when she was 16 years old. Her first international footbag tournament was the European Footbag Championships held in 2003 in Frankfurt, Germany. Today, she does not compete anymore, but still plays footbag occasionally. Elisabet Carine Ljunggren works at Nord University, Faculty of Social Science, Norway, as a Professor. She also is Vice Dean for Research and Development. She has been doing research with a gender perspective on entrepreneurship, innovation and policies related to these issues for the

NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS

xix

last 25 years. Professor Ljunggren has published a number of articles and book chapters both in Norway and abroad. She has been a guest co-editor for IJGE and JEC, and co-editing several books. She has published in the journals ET & P, ERD, IJGE and IJSB and leading a number of research projects. Nancy L. Malcom is an Associate Professor of Sociology at Georgia Southern University, where her focus areas span issues of sport, gender and childhood. In addition to examining how cheerleading has been shaped by Title IX, she has conducted research on the social construction of female athleticism in recreational girls’ softball, the experiences of women in CrossFit and portrayals of gender non-conforming boys in children’s storybooks. Maja Nilssen is an Associate Professor at Nord University, Norway. She holds two Bachelor’s degrees in European and American Studies and Political Science, a Master’s degree in Public Administration and a Ph.D. in Sociology (thesis topic: strengthening the role of government by innovations and smart governance). Her research interest mainly concerns public administration and governance in the age of societal complexity, more specifically innovative institutional practices in urban development and planning. Adele Pavlidis was awarded her Ph.D. in 2013 (Griffith University, Australia) and was recently awarded an Australian Research Council Discovery Early Career Research Award (DECRA) to continue her research into women’s participation in contact sports. She is the author of two monographs, including sport, gender and power: The Rise of Roller Derby (Routledge, 2014, with Simone Fullagar), and Feminism and a Vital Politics of Depression and Recovery (Palgrave, 2019, with Simone Fullagar and Wendy O’Brien) as well as a number of peer-reviewed journal articles and high-quality international journals. Tomas Peterson is Senior Professor at Malmö University. His research areas include sport and social entrepreneurship, the professionalization of Swedish football, selection and ranking in Swedish children’s and youth sports, the relation between school sport and competition sport, equal health, as well as sport politics. He was the investigator of the latest Official Report of the Swedish Government on Sport Policy.

xx

NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS

Kristen S. Pirie is a 2012 graduate of Georgia Southern University (B.S. Sociology) where she was a sideline cheerleader who also competed on the STUNT cheer team. After completing graduate studies at West Georgia University in 2017 (M.Ed. Professional Counseling), she now works as an elementary school counselor in Georgia. Katarina Schenker is an Associate Professor in Sports Science within the Faculty of Social Science, at Linnaeus University, Sweden. She studies the relationship between sport and social entrepreneurship from a Swedish sports policy perspective. Additionally, her research interests concern the inclusion and exclusion of children and youth in physical education and health (PE), as well as in the state-funded Swedish sports movement. Jeffrey O. Segrave is currently Professor of Health and Human Physiological Sciences at Skidmore College, Saratoga Springs, NY. His main area of scholarly interest lies in the socio-cultural analysis of sport; hence, he embraces an interdisciplinary approach that seeks to study sport at the intersections of history, sociology, philosophy and literature. He has edited three anthologies and published 16 book chapters and more than 60 articles on sport in a wide variety of journals including the International Journal of Comic Art, Olympika; the International Journal of Olympic Studies, Stadion; theInternational Journal of the History of Sport, Aethlon; the Journal of Sport Literature, and Journal of Popular Culture. Mads Skauge is a Ph.D. candidate in Sociology at Nord University, Norway. He holds a Bachelor’s and a Master’s degree from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) (Social Science and Sports Science, and Sports Sciences, respectively). Additionally, he holds a one-year program in sociology (NTNU), teacher education (NTNU) and personal trainer education (Norwegian School of Sports Sciences). His current research interests are social inequality, youth sports, fitness and Esports. Cem Tınaz is Director of the School of Sports Sciences and Technology at Istanbul Bilgi University since 2015. He is also an esteemed board member of the Turkish Tennis Federation since 2009. His areas of research interest for Dr. Tinaz include sport policy and development, administration, legacies and impacts of sport mega events—all integrated with his primary area of expertise in sports management.

NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS

xxi

Anne Tjønndal is an Associate Professor in the Faculty of Social Sciences, Nord University, Bodø, Norway. Tjønndal holds a Ph.D. in Sociology and a Master’s degree (M.Sc.) in Sports Science. Her academic work focuses on social innovation, technology, gender and social inclusion/exclusion in sport. Tjønndal is a member of the Young Academy of Norway (AYF). In 2019, she was awarded the Celia Brackenridge International Research Award for her paper “Girls are not made of glass!”: barriers experienced by women in Norwegian Olympic boxing,” published in the Sociology of Sport Journal. Alexandra Trahan is a Certified CrossFit Trainer (CF L-3) and has completed more than 10 continuing education workshops in the last six years. She has owned and operated two CrossFit affiliates in Louisiana. Her coaching revolves around correcting faulty movement patterns, reducing injury risk and optimizing nutrition. She is currently Head Coach at CrossFit Boro in Statesboro, GA, that has over 200 members and nine coaches, and has multiple competitions for all levels each year. Charlotte Van Tuyckom has been affiliated with Howest School of Applied Sciences (Bruges, Belgium), Department of Sport and movement sciences, since 2013. Previously, she worked as healthcare consultant at InSites Consulting and taught sports and health sociology and statistics at Ghent University, Sporthochschule Köln, WHO Geneva and Essex University. She published several articles and books in this domain. Her current research interests include the impact of technology on the field of sport and gamification in particular. Charlotte holds a Ph.D. in Sport Sociology, is Master in Sociology and Master in Quantitative Analysis. She has a passion for science communication and the world of statistics and data. In her free time, she likes to run and cycle, and you can always invite her for a game of tennis. Rachel Miller Wood is a 2012 graduate of Georgia Southern University (B.S. General Studies, minors in Psychology and Sociology) where she was both a sideline cheerleader and member of the STUNT cheer team. She spent several years working in real estate marketing and is now a stay-at-home mom to two young children.

List of Figures

Fig. 5.1

Fig. 12.1

The three socially deprived neighbourhoods in Bruges (Zeebrugge, Sint-Pieters and Sint-Jozef), based on the Flemish “poverty index” The derby track

82 232

xxiii

List of Tables

Table 1.1 Table Table Table Table Table

4.1 7.1 8.1 9.1 10.1

The invention and development of the RaceRunner bike as a social innovation in sport Respondents Research participants Sample of texts The interviewees The integration of the Linux Development Model and the CrossFit Development Model

9 61 119 141 175 198

xxv

PART I

Theoretical Perspectives on Social Innovation in Sport

CHAPTER 1

Social Innovation in Sport: An Introduction to the Theory Anne Tjønndal

Defining Innovation and Social Innovation The word ‘innovation’ has its origin in the Latin word ‘innovare’, which means to renew, revive or create something new (Kalsaas & Bunk, 2013). Innovation as a scholarly field is often thought to originate from the academic work of economist Joseph Schumpeter (1883–1950), who many describe as the father of innovation research (Fagerberg, 2005). Schumpeter defined innovation as a new commodity, a product of better quality, new methods of production, new markets, new materials or new ways of organizing production (Schumpeter, 1983). Hence, for Schumpeter, innovation was closely tied to business, markets and competitive advantage that would bring financial gain. In Schumpeter’s understanding of innovation, it was crucial that any new idea, process or product should be commercialized and introduced to a market (Berge, 2015). However, the term has been developed and transformed since Schumpeter’s time. Now, innovation is an analytical concept that is linked to a wide range of

A. Tjønndal (B) Nord University, Bodø, Norway e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 A. Tjønndal (ed.), Social Innovation in Sport, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63765-1_1

3

4

A. TJØNNDAL

different academic fields, such as political science, sociology, organization and leadership studies, welfare and public sector services, entrepreneurship, business and management (Goldsmith, 2010; Hartley, Sørensen, & Torfing, 2013; Ratten, 2015). With the expansion of innovation in different academic fields, innovation has become a popular buzzword among politicians, leaders and stakeholders in the private, public and voluntary sectors (Sørensen & Torfing, 2012). This has led to a development in which being ‘innovative’ is considered a merit to strive for in many different contexts (Hull & Lio, 2006; Willumsen, Sirnes, & Ødegård, 2015), and there are now very few settings in which someone will openly claim that they see no advantages to innovation, new ideas or innovative solutions. Innovation is transformation and renewal. Innovation can be a new discovery, something that has never been seen before, or an improvement of something established (Baldwin & Hanel, 2003). Innovation takes place in different contexts and has different purposes and aims. Hence, the changes that innovation bring are sometimes small adaptions to everyday practices, and other times, radical, paradigm shifting inventions. From this description alone it is easy to see why many people struggle to grasp what constitutes innovation. First and foremost, it is important to remember that innovation is nothing new. It is our framing of improvement and change as innovation that is new. Fagerberg (2005) expresses it like this: Innovation is not a new phenomenon. Arguably, it is as old as mankind itself. Without it, the world in which we live would look very, very different. Try for a moment to think of a world without airplanes, automobiles, telecommunications, and refrigerators, just to mention a few of the more important innovations from the not-too-distant past. Or – from an even longer perspective – where would the world be without such fundamental innovations as agriculture, the wheel, the alphabet, or printing? (Fagerberg, 2005, p. 1)

When we talk about innovation nowadays we often refer to technology, products or improved efficiency in businesses and private sector enterprises (Darsø, 2012, 2013). Our way of thinking about innovation is shaped by the fields innovation literature originated in (economy, management and business). A defining feature of Schumpeter’s pioneering work on innovation was his focus on the role of the entrepreneur in the development of innovation (Johnstad, 2011; Schumpeter, 1934/1980). In “The Theory of Economic Development”

1

SOCIAL INNOVATION IN SPORT …

5

(1934/1980), Schumpeter argues that entrepreneurship is the driving force behind innovation and economic growth in society (McCraw, 2007). Through new combinations and new ideas, the entrepreneur creates innovations such as new modes of organizing and consumer products (Johnson, 2010). The economic background that innovation literature builds on strongly influences innovation research today. Thus, innovation research has been dominated by business perspectives with an empirical focus on companies, businesses and financial advantages in the private sector (Hartley, 2005; Hartley et al., 2013). Innovation is often criticized for being an overly vague concept. Some say that innovation is simply a buzzword and has no academic or analytical value. In many cases such criticism is valid. After all, there is no universally accepted definition of what innovation is (Bason, 2007; Darsø, 2013; Gjelsvik, 2007). Baregheh, Rowley, and Sambrook (2009) suggested that there were more than sixty definitions of innovation spanning over different academic fields, such as business and management, organizational studies, technology, marketing, sociology, political science, knowledge management and economics. Now, in 2020, there are probably even more definitions of innovation. This is further complicated by the vastness and complexity of the innovation research field. Even fifteen years ago, Fagerberg (2005) noted that: Two decades ago, it was still possible for a hard-working student to get a fairly good overview of the scholarly work on innovation by devoting a few years of intensive study to the subject. Not anymore. Today, the literature on innovation is so large and diverse that even keeping up-to-date with one specific field of research is very challenging. (Fagerberg, 2005, p. 4)

It is easy to agree that innovation is nothing more than a vague buzzword of little scholarly value if we rely on the more simplistic definitions of innovation. Examples of such definitions are McKeown’s (2008) description of innovation as “new stuff that is made useful ”, Mulgan and Albury’s (2003) definition of “new ideas that work”, or as Altschuler and Zegans’ (1997) “novelty in action”. Despite more substantial definitions, such as Sørensen and Torfing’s (2011): “an intentional and proactive process that involves the generation and practical adoption and spread of new and creative ideas, which aim to produce a qualitative change in a specific context ” (Sørensen & Torfing, 2011, p. 849), many definitions leave room for individual interpretations of what constitutes innovation. For

6

A. TJØNNDAL

example, what is a “qualitative change in a specific context”? By critically examining this definition of innovation, inventions such as the atom bomb or the gas chambers used in Auschwitz during the second world war could be regarded as “innovations”, in that they represent a qualitative change in a specific field – warfare. This is where the term social innovation comes into play, as a critique of the more “open” definitions of innovation such as those mentioned above. Social innovation stands out from the traditional Schumpeterian perspective on innovation because it is not centred around the development of new commercial products, new consumer markets or production efficiency (Nicholls, Simon, & Gabriel, 2015). Hence, social innovation is rarely studied from a business and management perspective, but is often explored in academic fields such as sociology, psychology, health and welfare, and political science (Mulgan, 2012, 2015; Mulgan, Tucker, Ali, & Sanders, 2007). As a theoretical framework it is relatively new and there is therefore no established definition or paradigm of what social innovation is (Nicholls, 2010). However, a growing body of research is demonstrating that innovation and creative new thinking are important tools for solving complex social issues in modern society (Nicholls & Murdock, 2012). This anthology builds on social innovation as it is defined by Murray, Calulier-Grice, and Mulgan 2010: New ideas that work to address pressing unmet needs, that are both social in their ends and in their means. Social innovations are new ideas (products, services and models) that simultaneously meet social needs (more effectively than alternatives) and create new social relationships and collaborations. (Murray et al., 2010, p. 14)

Hence, inventions such as the atom bomb or tomahawk missiles are not innovations from the perspective of social innovation, because such advances in warfare do not address unmet social needs in society. Due to its focus on solving unmet social needs, social innovation is often utilized in research on public sector services and welfare. Public sector research often builds on a relational understanding of innovation, defining it as proactive processes that seek to solve problems and challenges, develop new ideas and implement creative solutions (Torfing, Sørensen, & Aagaard, 2014). This part of the innovation literature often describes

1

SOCIAL INNOVATION IN SPORT …

7

the term innovation as ‘social innovation’, ‘open innovation’ or ‘collaborative innovation’ with a focus on qualitative improvements in specific contexts and public sector services (Bommert, 2010; Chesbrough, 2003).

Innovation in Sport Sport is inherently innovative due to its capacity to adapt, evolve and change according to social, political and technological trends (Ratten & Ferreira, 2016). The ability of sport to adapt to a changing environment is reinforced by increasing globalization, commercialization and the emergence of new sports as a result of practitioners’ novel ideas (Tjønndal, 2018a). Ringuet-Riot, Hahn, and James (2013) describe innovation in sport as crucial solutions to predefined problems and requirements to work towards maximizing the performances of individuals and organizations. From this perspective, innovation represents a valuable part of sports development. As an analytical term, innovation implies both the creation and implementation of new ideas that can emerge at both an institutional and individual level (Caza, 2000; Viljamaa, 2007). Schumpeter described innovation as the introduction of new technologies or new products (Hartley, 2005; Moore & Hartley, 2008), but the innovations developed in sport organizations are rarely of this nature. Rather, they are more often changes that are described as ‘improvements’, ‘reforms’ or ‘new ideas’ (Miragaia & Ferreira, 2016; Tjønndal, 2016). This does not mean that innovations like new technologies or new products are not part of sport development, but that these more Schumpeterian types of innovation are most common in the sports equipment industry and in elite sport. For instance, in elite sport there are many examples of technological innovations that aim to enhance athletic performance or better measure athletes’ performances. The recent development of carbon fibre soles in running shoes, such as Nike Vaporfly, is an example of technological sport innovation aimed at enhancing long-distance running performances in elite sport. Likewise, apps, such as Coach’s Eye which is designed to help coaches evaluate athlete performance, or the BXTRACK technology that measures the velocity, frequency and types of punches boxers throw in training sessions, are examples of elite sport innovations that aim to track athletic performance more accurately than has previously been possible in order to produce new records and better elite sport performances.

8

A. TJØNNDAL

The goal of any innovation is to create new value, whether this be economic or social (Hipp & Grupp, 2005). It might be in the form of a new product, such as Nike’s Vaporfly shoes, a new service like the development of the Rock Steady Boxing1 programme to enhance the fitness of people with Parkinson’s disease, or new ways of organizing sporting activities.2 Innovation in sport can be modest and aim at making changes and adaptations to already existing services or products, or radical, such as the development of new knowledge, technology and concepts that have not previously been available. Building on Ratten’s (2011a, 2011b, 2011c) work on sport entrepreneurship, and Sørensen and Torfing’s (2011) theoretical definition of innovation, sport innovation is here defined as proactive and intentional processes that involve the generation and practical adoption of new and creative ideas aimed at producing a qualitative change in a sports context.

What Is Social Innovation in Sport? The RaceRunner Bike and Other Examples In elite sport, technological innovations ensure that athlete performances improve as teams and athletes strive for new records, new championships and new victories. In a sport context in which competitors are always well prepared and the bat of an eyelid can be the difference between a gold and silver medal, every small advantage counts in the pursuit of sporting excellence. In other words, the competitiveness of elite sport serves as a spur for innovation, for instance through the improvement and development of new and better sports equipment and performance enhancing technologies. Examples of technological innovations in elite sport include the introduction of clap skates in speed skating, bench shirts in powerlifting, carbon fibre soles in running shoes, wearable force sensors in martial arts (Chi & Res, 2005) and polyurethane swimsuits in competitive swimming (Balmer, Pleasence, & Nevill, 2012). However, most of the innovations in elite sport are not social innovations. Hean (2015) describes four phases of any social innovation. The first is the identification of a social need. The second phase is the development of solutions and responses to this social need. The third is the evaluation of the effectiveness of the new solutions (how effectively do they solve the social need?). Finally, the fourth phase is the spread and adoption of successful social innovation. In sport, an example of a social innovation that follows all Hean’s (2015) four phases is the development of the

1

SOCIAL INNOVATION IN SPORT …

9

RaceRunner bike. This bike was designed by the Danish former Paralympian Connie Hansen to give individuals challenged with things like balance, a range of motion and mobility resulting from cerebral palsy, muscular dystrophy, spina bifida, stroke, amputation or other physical disabilities, the ability to run without the risk of falling over and being injured. A RaceRunner is a customized bike with three wheels, no pedals and a supportive frame that allows the user to run without having to rely on balance. The bike’s custom frame provides people with disabilities— particularly those who are dependent on electric wheelchairs, manual wheelchairs or walkers—the opportunity to move around on their own and have a sense of running freely. Some use the RaceRunner for recreational walks and runs, others for competing in track and road races. Hence, the invention of the RaceRunner spurred the development of a new sport: RaceRunning. This is an ideal sport for people with disabilities that affect their balance, where athletes use running frames to compete. RaceRunning has grown in popularity to the point where it is now an international disability sport that is recognized by the Cerebral Palsy International Sports and Recreation Association (CPISRA) and included in the International Wheelchair & Amputee Sports Federation Games (IWAS). Returning to Hean’s (2015) framework of social innovation, the development of the RaceRunner bike can be described as a venture that includes the four phases of social innovation. This development is summarized in Table 1.1. Table 1.1 The invention and development of the RaceRunner bike as a social innovation in sport Innovation phase

The RaceRunner bike

Identification of social need

Lack of opportunities to participate in sport for people with physical disabilities that affect balance and mobility The invention and design of the RaceRunner Adaption of different models to suit different individuals Implementation of RaceRunning as a sport

Development of a solution Evaluation of the solution Spread and adoption of successful social innovation

10

A. TJØNNDAL

From a more traditional, Schumpeterian perspective of innovation, we could say that the RaceRunner is simply a technological innovation, the development of a new commercial product, or the development of a new type of consumer in the bike industry. But what makes the RaceRunner a social innovation in sport? The best way to illustrate this is to compare it with other technological innovations in elite sport, such as the full body polyurethane swimsuit, which was designed to improve performances in elite swimming by making swimmers float higher, have less water resistance and move faster when competing, thereby leading to more records being broken. The International Swimming Federation (FINA) eventually banned the use of these swimsuits in competitions, regarding them as ‘technological doping’ (Barrow, 2012). The point of comparing these two technological sport innovations is to highlight that while the RaceRunner was developed to give individuals with physical disabilities new opportunities to engage in sport, the polyurethane swimsuit was designed to reach new world records in elite swimming. Thus, comparing the RaceRunner bike with the polyurethane swimsuit illustrates the difference between an innovation in sports technology and a social innovation in sports technology. Three Types of Social Innovation in Sport There are many ways of conceptualizing social innovation. A common framework is that of Nicholls and Murdock (2012), who have identified three types of social innovation: (1) incremental innovation, (2) institutional social innovation and (3) disruptive social innovation. They describe incremental social innovation as minor improvements in services or everyday practices at a micro level that seek to solve social issues experienced by small groups of people. In their work, Nicholls and Murdock (ibid.) exemplify incremental social innovation as minor improvements in public services that better meet the needs of individuals than previous alternatives. An example of incremental social innovation in sport is Hayhurst’s (2014) study of a martial arts programme for girls and women in Uganda. In this study, she highlights how martial arts programmes are used to achieve gender and equality for Ugandan girls through a socially innovative sport programme that employs entrepreneurial tactics, such as training to be martial arts instructors, combined with agricultural activities, such as cultivating nuts. Hence, the martial arts programme encourages young women to become entrepreneurs themselves. Although

1

SOCIAL INNOVATION IN SPORT …

11

her study can be read as an empirical example of incremental innovation in a sport for development programme, she concludes that even though these initiatives can bring some individual improvement for the women undertaking the martial arts programme, the programme itself overlooks the broader structural inequalities and gender relations that marginalize girls in the first place. In other words, incremental social innovations may create social value for the individual, but do not always effectively address inequality issues at a structural level. Institutional social innovations aim to change existing social and/or economic structures in order to implement social improvements. These innovations are aimed at the meso level and seek to find solutions to social problems experienced in larger organizations or networks of people (Nicholls & Murdock, 2012). An example of institutional social innovation in sport is Evans, Davies, and Penney’s (1997) study of a policy innovation for the social inclusion of girls and women in physical education in the UK, in which they explore innovative structural reforms that aim to make physical education programmes more gender neutral and enjoyable for both boys and girls. Another example of institutional innovation in sport is Undlien’s (2017, 2019a, 2019b) studies of the inclusion of people with intellectual disabilities as volunteers during the 2016 Youth Olympic Winter Games in Lillehammer, Norway. Undlien’s studies show how this initiative created personal enjoyment during the event and had lasting social value, in that many of the volunteers were able to establish working relationships with local businesses and organizations that resulted in permanent jobs when the Youth Olympic Games were over. Hence, institutional social innovations in sport differ from incremental social innovations by introducing improvements that go beyond the individual and affect organizations or networks of organizations. In Undlien’s case (2017, 2019a, 2019b), this is represented by local businesses and organizations recruiting a more socially diverse workforce by including young adults with intellectual disabilities in their organization. Lastly, Nicholls and Murdock (2012) describe disruptive social innovation as innovations that seek to radically alter social systems and structural power relations in favour of marginalized groups of people. These social innovations attempt to solve complex social issues at a macro-level (Tjønndal, 2018c). Naturally, such radical innovations are few and far between in sport and in other social contexts. Sporting events, such as the creation of the Paralympics, the Special Olympics or the Homeless World Cup in football, can potentially be considered as examples of disruptive social

12

A. TJØNNDAL

innovations in sport. A more recent example could be the implementation of the Youth Olympic Games. Jacques Rogge, the former president of the International Olympic Committee (IOC), brought the idea of the Youth Olympic Games with him into his presidency. Rogge’s ambition was that the Youth Olympic Games should not just be an elite sport event for youth athletes (Nordhagen & Lesjø, 2018). Rather, the main objective of the new Olympic event was to provide youth athletes with an arena for Olympic education. Learning, friendship and cultural exchange was to be as important as the sport competitions (Nordhagen & Krieger, 2019). A problem with disruptive social innovations is that it is hard to determine when something is “new enough” or “radical enough” to be considered a disruptive social innovation. For instance, have the Paralympics or the Special Olympics really altered the structural power relations in sport radically? Most people would answer no to this question. The white, able-bodied man is still at the top of the hierarchy of what is valued in the elite sporting world, while the disabled athlete remains marginalized and marked as “the other”. Do, then, the Paralympics and the Special Olympics really represent disruptive social innovation in sport? The same can be said of the Youth Olympic Games. Has IOC succeeded in creating an elite sport event where education is as important as the sporting competitions? Many would argue that this is not the case. Then, if these examples do not constitute disruptive social innovation in sport, then what is? Where do we draw the line? When has a social innovation succeeded in altering social systems and structural power relations in favour of the marginalized? Improvements in international sport policies, such as the inclusion of women’s boxing in the 2012 Olympics in London, are also examples of disruptive social innovation. At first sight, this political process can be seen as a disruptive social innovation in sport in that it grants female athletes worldwide access to a realm of elite sport that was previously closed to them (Tjønndal, 2019). On the one hand, the inclusion of women’s boxing as an Olympic sport led to many countries increasing their resources for female boxing. On the other hand, women boxers have fewer spots in the Olympics than men. In the 2021 Tokyo Olympic Games 54 slots have been allocated to female boxers, compared to 230 for their male counterparts. Hence, even though women now have access to the Olympic boxing ring, men still dominate the boxing world and the structural gendered power relations remain unchanged. Against this

1

SOCIAL INNOVATION IN SPORT …

13

backdrop, it is questionable whether the inclusion of women’s boxing in the Olympic Games represents a disruptive social innovation in sport.

Conclusion The different types of social innovation described here illustrate the complex nature the social innovation process in sport. Social innovation takes place in the public, volunteer and private sectors (Murray et al. 2010). Often, social innovation processes occur as collaboration between actors from different sectors, such as volunteer sports organizations and private commercial companies in the sports industry. Social innovation in sport arises when athletes, coaches and sports organizations are faced with social issues that require new and creative solutions (Tjønndal, 2016). In this way, social innovation encourages solutions to complex social issues in sport contexts. Still, social innovations are often complex and time-consuming processes and are not automatically, or always, positive. Social innovation processes can lead to unintended consequences that negatively impact the implementation phase of the innovation (Sørensen & Torfing, 2011), such as sports policies or programmes aimed at the social inclusion of a specific target group, or projects aimed at increasing sports participation amongst minority groups. As research has shown, many such initiatives do not fully reach their goal of social improvement in sport.

Notes 1. For more information, see https://www.rocksteadyboxing.org/about/. 2. See for instance Chapter 9 in this anthology.

References Altschuler, A., & Zegans, M. (1997). Innovation and public management: Notes from the state house and city hall. In A. Altschuler & R. Behn (Eds.), Innovation in American Government. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution. Baldwin, J., & Hanel, P. (2003). Innovation and knowledge creation in an open economy: Canadian industry and international implications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

14

A. TJØNNDAL

Balmer, N., Pleasence, P., & Nevill, A. (2012). Evolution and revolution: Gauging the impact of technological and technical innovation on Olympic performance. Journal of Sports Sciences, 30, 1075–1083. https://doi.org/10. 1080/02640414.2011.587018. Baregheh, A., Rowley, J., & Sambrook, S. (2009). Towards a multidisciplinary definition of innovation. Management Decision, 47, 1323–1339. https://doi. org/10.1108/00251740910984578. Barrow, J. D. (2012). Mathletics. New York: W. W. Norton. Bason, C. (2007). Velfaerdsinnovation. Ledelse av nytaenkning i den offentlige sector [Innovation. Leadership and new ideas in public sector]. København: Børsen Forlag. Berge, D. M. (2015). Innovasjon – et begrep i drift [Innovation – a fluent term]. In E. Willumsen & A. Ødegård (Eds.), Sosial innovasjon – fra politikk til tjenesteutvikling [Social innovation – from politics to services] (pp. 117–135). Bergen: Fagbokforlaget. Bommert, B. (2010). Collaborative innovation in the public sector. International Public Management Review, 11(1), 15–33. Caza, A. (2000). Context receptivity: Innovation in an amateur sport organization. Journal of Sport Management, 14, 227–242. https://doi.org/10.1123/ jsm.14.3.227. Chesbrough, H. W. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Chi, E. H., & Res, P. A. (2005). Introducing wearable force sensors in martial arts. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 4, 47–53. https://doi.org/10.1109/MPRV. 2005.67. Darsø, L. (2012). Innovation competency – An essential organizational asset. In S. Høyrup, M. Bonnafous-Boucher, C. Hasse, M. Lotz, & K. Møller (Eds.), Employee driven innovation. A new approach (pp. 108–126). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Darsø, L. (2013). Innovationspædagogik. Kunsten at fremelske innovationskompetence. Fredriksberg: Samfundslitteratur. Evans, J., Davies, B., & Penney, D. (1997). Making progress? Sport policy, women and innovation in physical education. European Journal of Physical Education, 2, 39–50. Fagerberg, J. (2005). Innovation: A guide to the literature. In J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery, & R. R. Nelson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gjelsvik, M. (2007). Innovasjonsledelse. Ledelse av innovasjon og internt entreprenørskap [Innovation leadership. Leadership, innovation and entrepreneurship]. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget. Goldsmith, S. (2010). The power of social innovation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

1

SOCIAL INNOVATION IN SPORT …

15

Hartley, J. (2005). Innovation in governance and public services. Past and present. Public Money and Management, 25(1), 27–34. Hartley, J., Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2013). Collaborative innovation: Viable alternative to market competition and organizational entrepreneurship. Public Administration Review, 73, 821–830. Hayhurst, L. M. C. (2014). The ‘Girl Effect’ and martial arts: Social entrepreneurship and sport, gender and development in Uganda. Gender, Place & Culture, 21, 297–315. Hean, S. (2015). Samarbeid, samproduksjon og sosial innovasjon. In E. Willumsen & A. Ødegård (Eds.), Sosial Innovasjon – fra politikk til tjenesteutvikling (pp. 153–161). Fagbokforlaget: Bergen. Hipp, C., & Grupp, H. (2005). Innovation in the service sector. Research Policy, 34, 517–535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.03.002. Hull, C. E., & Lio, B. H. (2006). Innovation in the service sector: The demand for service-specific innovation measurement concepts and typologies. Research Policy, 34, 517–535. Johnson, R. J. (2010). New innovations in sports medicine: Good for the patient or good for the pocketbook? Current Sports Medicine Reports, 9, 191–193. https://doi.org/10.1249/JSR.0b013e3181e7cb75. Johnstad, T. (2011). Innovasjonsforskning – ulike perspektiver og mulig integrasjon. In H. C. Garman Johnsen & Ø. Pålshaugen (Eds.), Hva er innovasjon? Perspektiver i norsk innovasjonsforskning – Bind I: System og institusjon (pp. 179–196). Kristiansand: Høyskoleforlaget. Kalsaas, B. T., & Bunk, B. (2013). Service-based innovation. In H. C. Garman Johnsen & Ø. Pålshaugen (Eds.), Hva er Innovasjon? Perspektiver i norsk innovasjonsforskning [What is innovation? Perspectives on Norwegian innvoation research]. Oslo: Cappelen Damm Akademisk. McCraw, T. K. (2007). Prophet of innovation. Cambridge: Belknap Harvard. McKeown, M. (2008). The truth about innovation. London, UK: Prentice Hall. Miragaia, D., & Ferreira, J. J. (2016). Consumer behavior analysis: An innovation approach in non-profit sports organizations. In V. Ratten & J. J. Ferreira (Eds.), Sport entrepreneurship and innovation. London: Routledge. Moore, M., & Hartley, J. (2008). Innovations in governance. Public Management Review, 10(1), 3–20. Mulgan, G. (2012). The theoretical foundation of Social Innovation. In A. Nicholls & A. Murdock (Eds.), Social innovation: Blurring boundaries to reconfigure markets. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Mulgan, G. (2015). Foreword: The study of social innovation – Theory, practice and progress. In A. Nicholls, J. Simon, & M. Gabriel (Eds.), New frontiers in social innovation research. Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Mulgan, G., & Albury, D. (2003). Innovation in the public sector. London: Cabinet Office.

16

A. TJØNNDAL

Mulgan, G., Tucker, S., Ali, R., & Sanders, B. (2007). Social innovation: What is it, why it matters and how it can be accelerated. Oxford: Skoll Centre for Social Entrepreneurship. Murray, R., Calulier-Grice, J., & Mulgan, G. (2010). Open book of social innovation. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/innovation/ policy/social-innovation/. Nicholls, A. (2010). The legitimacy of social entrepreneurship: reflexive isomorphism in a pre-paradigmatic field. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(4), 611–633. Nicholls, A., & Murdock, A. (2012). Social innovation: Blurring boundaries to reconfigure markets. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Nicholls, A., Simon, J., & Gabriel, M. (2015). Introduction: Dimensions of social innovation. In A. Nicholls, J. Simon, & M. Gabriel (Eds.), New frontiers in social innovation research (pp. 1–26). Basingstoke, Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Nordhagen, S. E., & Krieger, J. (2019). Coping with dual logics at one event: The participating athletes’ perceptions from the 2016 Winter Youth Olympic Games. The International Journal of Sport and Society, 11(1), 59–76. https:// doi.org/10.18848/2152-7857/CGP/v11i01/59-76. Nordhagen, S. E., & Lesjø, J. H. (2018). Rogge’s Games: Establishing the Youth Olympic Games as a new event in the Olympic Movement. The International Journal of the History of Sport, 35(11), 1091–1110. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/09523367.2018.1532958. RaceRunning. (2015, September 22). What is RaceRunning 2015 [Videofile]. Retrieved 24 July 2019 from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwW_ RymN_VA. Ratten, V. (2011a). Sport-based entrepreneurship: Towards a new theory of entrepreneurship and sport management. International Entrepreneurship Management Journal, 7, 57–69. Ratten, V. (2011b). A social perspective of sports-based entrepreneurship. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 12, 314–326. Ratten, V. (2011c). Social entrepreneurship and innovation in sports. International Journal of Social Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 1, 42–54. Ratten, V. (2015). Athletes as entrepreneurs: The role of social capital and leadership ability. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 25, 442–455. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJESB.2015.070217. Ratten, V., & Ferreira, J. J. (2016). Sport entrepreneurship and innovation – concepts and theory. In V. Ratten & J. J. Ferreira (Eds.), Sport entrepreneurship and innovation. London: Routledge. Ringuet-Riot, C. J., Hahn, A., & James, D. A. (2013). A structured approach for technology innovation in sport. Sports Technology, 6, 137–149. https:// doi.org/10.1080/19346182.2013.868468.

1

SOCIAL INNOVATION IN SPORT …

17

Schumpeter, J. A. (1934/1980). The theory of economic development: An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books. Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2011). Enhancing collaborative innovation in the public sector. Administration & Society, 43, 842–868. Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2012). Introduction: Collaborative innovation in the public sector. The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal, 17, 1–14. Tjønndal, A. (2016). Innovation for social inclusion in sport. In V. Ratten & J. Ferreira (Eds.), Sport entrepreneurship and innovation. London: Routledge. Tjønndal, A. (2018a). Sport innovation: Developing a typology. European Journal for Sport and Society, 15(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/161 38171.2017.1421504. Tjønndal, A. (2018b). Idrett, innovasjon og sosial inkludering: Fremveksten av Mixed Martial Arts i Norge. Scandinavian Sport Studies Forum, 9, 1–24. Tjønndal, A. (2018c). Vilje til inkludering – studier av innovasjon for sosial inkludering i idrett [Intention to include: Studies of innovation for social inclusion in sport] (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Nord University, Bodø, Norway. Tjønndal, A. (2019). ‘I don’t think they realise how good we are’: Innovation, inclusion and exclusion in women’s Olympic boxing. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 54(2), 131–150. https://doi.org/10.1177/101269021 7715642. Torfing, J., Sørensen, E., & Aagaard, P. (2014). Samarbejdsdrevet innovation i praksis: en Introduktion. In P. Aagaard, E. Sørensen, & J. Torfing (Eds.), Samarbejdsdrevet innovation i praksis. Jurist- og Økonomiforbundets Forlag: København. Undlien, R. (2017). The Youth Olympic Games as an opportunity for sports entrepreneurship. International Journal of Sport Management and Marketing, 17 (4/5/6), 283–307. Undlien, R. (2019a). Being a part of it: People with intellectual disabilities as volunteers in the Youth Olympic Games. Journal of Sport for Development, 7 (12), 33–45. Undlien, R. (2019b). Lasting social value or a one-off? People with intellectual disabilities’ experiences with volunteering for the Youth Olympic Games. Journal of Sport for Development, 7 (13), 33–45. Viljamaa, K. (2007). Technological and cultural challenges in local innovation support activities – Emerging knowledge interactions in Charlotte’s motor sport cluster. European Planning Studies, 15, 1215–1232. Willumsen, E., Sirnes, T., & Ødegård, A. (2015). Innovasjon innen helse og velferd – sosial innovasjon [Innovation in health – social innovation]. In E.

18

A. TJØNNDAL

Willumsen & A. Ødegård (Eds.), Sosial innovasjon – fra politikk til tjenesteutvikling [Social innovation – from politics to services] (pp. 25–45). Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.

CHAPTER 2

Social Innovation and Social Entrepreneurship: Useful Theories for Sport? Mikhail Kosmynin and Elisabet Carine Ljunggren

Introduction As indicated by the United Nations (UN) and its Sustainability Development Goals (SDGs), the world faces a number of complex problems, or ‘grand challenges’, such as poverty, hunger and inequality. Many of these problems cannot be resolved by standard solutions or increased budgets (Kobro et al., 2018; Shaw & de Bruin, 2013). When it comes to social problems (e.g. SDGs 1–5, 8 and 10), social entrepreneurship and social innovation are increasingly seen as essential for developing solutions that address complex and multi-faceted challenges, such as the crisis in the welfare state, social exclusion, inequalities and climate change (Kibler, Salmivaara, Stenholm, & Terjesen, 2018; Mulgan, Tucker, Rushanara, & Sanders, 2007; Nicholls & Murdock, 2012). Many politicians

M. Kosmynin (B) · E. C. Ljunggren Nord University, Bodø, Norway e-mail: [email protected] E. C. Ljunggren e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 A. Tjønndal (ed.), Social Innovation in Sport, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63765-1_2

19

20

M. KOSMYNIN AND E. C. LJUNGGREN

and policymakers trust that social entrepreneurship and social innovation solutions will revitalize the welfare services and address the present challenges (Doherty, Horne, & Wootton, 2014; Howaldt, Kaletka & Schröder, 2016). At the same time, it is held that social innovation and social entrepreneurship could harness some of sport’s potential to promote democratic and social values (Bjärsholm, 2017; Reid, 2017). For instance, The Norwegian Olympic and Paralympic Committee and Confederation of Sports (NIF) has suggested playfulness, ambitious, honesty and inclusion as its main ways ahead (NIF, 2019). The subject of sport and social entrepreneurship and innovation has also gained significant academic interest to the extent that these concepts have now become more popular in a sports context (Bjärsholm, 2017; Peterson & Schenker, 2018; Ratten, 2019a). The nascent research on social entrepreneurship and innovation in sports has also experienced significant growth, with more empirical studies now embedding a social innovation and social entrepreneurial perspective (Ratten, 2019b). However, when reviewing the literature on social innovation and social entrepreneurship, it is evident that they can be seen as contemporary buzzwords that are used in a wide variety of policy practices and academic discourses (Fougère, Segercrantz, & Seeck, 2017). Furthermore, the social dimension of innovation and entrepreneurship is not always accompanied by a consensus about what social innovation and social entrepreneurship entails (Bartels, 2017). In this conceptual book chapter, the aim is to examine the theoretical concepts of social innovation and social entrepreneurship and indicate their use in a sports context. Throughout the chapter we focus on two examples of social innovation in sport and one of social entrepreneurship in order to link the discussion to the sports context. Our first example is a project launched by the Norwegian Cyclists’ Association (NCA) that aim to raise people’s awareness of the everyday possibilities the bicycle has to offer—as means of transportation to work, for recreation and as a source of exciting experiences and improved health. The NCA has developed a bicycle training course that is especially aimed at women with minority backgrounds as this is a group that cycles less than the average Norwegian. The NCA argues that cycling gives independence, freedom, mobility and mastery, enhances health and life quality and can be positive for the environment. The second example is street football, a variation of football that does not require a football field or a team of 11 players. The Norwegian Salvation Army has introduced this activity into its work for the treatment of

2

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP …

21

substance abuse with vulnerable people, such as the homeless, drug users, newly released prisoners etc. They are invited to participate in exercises, matches and attend the Homeless World Cup in street football. Both these examples relate to social innovation in sport. Our third example is related to social entrepreneurship and is the non-profit social venture BUA, which provides a lending service of sports and leisure equipment to children and youth in order to give them a greater access to sport. Due to the increasing importance of social innovation and social entrepreneurship (Cajaiba-Santana, 2014; Montessori, 2016), this chapter sets out to collate different insights into social innovation and social entrepreneurship and discuss their usefulness in the context of sport innovations and social change. Hence, the research question guiding this chapter is: How can social entrepreneurship and social innovation be understood, what is their origin, and how can the concepts be utilized in a sports context? The chapter is organized as follows: the first sub-section introduces the ‘social’ dimension of social entrepreneurship and outlines its various facets. Next, we present the ‘social’ dimensions of innovation. Finally, we discuss how social entrepreneurship and social innovation can contribute to the development and understanding of social innovation in sport and thereby achieve sport’s potential for the creation of democratic and social values.

The ‘Social’ Dimension of Social Entrepreneurship The topic of entrepreneurship has interested scholars for many years and has primarily been associated with the formation of new businesses. Entrepreneurship became a well-defined area in economic theory when Schumpeter published his seminal work in 1911 (Swedberg, 2000). Schumpeter’s ideas about entrepreneurship, entrepreneurs and innovation were not based on social entrepreneurship, social entrepreneurs or social innovation, but were part of the neo-classic economics that focused on understanding the dynamics of macroeconomics. However, since then the entrepreneurship field has moved forward and expanded into fields with non-economic gains. The first publications on social entrepreneurship appeared in the 1990s and although this literature has perhaps not always uncovered new phenomena, its perspective on existing activities was novel. One element that gave social entrepreneurship momentum was the fact that it prioritized social value rather than economic wealth

22

M. KOSMYNIN AND E. C. LJUNGGREN

as its main objective (Corner & Ho, 2010). This has been a contribution to the for-profit entrepreneurship theory field and has facilitated an understanding of entrepreneurial action as being more than economic motivation and rationalisation. Research on social entrepreneurship has both drawn on and benefited from previous academic works on entrepreneurship (Grieco, 2015). As a result, several studies have been dedicated to highlighting the similarities and differences between commercial and social entrepreneurship, with a particular emphasis on defining the special features of the latter (Austin, Stevenson, & Wei-Skillern, 2006; Shaw & Carter, 2007). Although there are many similarities between social and traditional entrepreneurship, they also diverge (Shaw & Carter, 2007). For example, social entrepreneurship is distinguished from its counterpart by its objectives and mission. As the Schumpeterian approach assumed that competitiveness and rivalry between entrepreneurs led to innovation and thereby generated higher margins and profit, it is questionable whether Schumpeterian ideas can be directly transferred to the concept of social entrepreneurship (Schmitz, 2015). Rivalry, competitiveness, margins and profit as drivers for social entrepreneurs are difficult to transfer to the context of social needs. Although there is no consensus on any one definition of social entrepreneurship, the common denominator in all the definitions is that the underlying motives for social entrepreneurship are to create social value and tackle a particular social issue, rather than economic gain, shareholder wealth and other personal goals (Austin, Stevenson, & Wei-Skillern, 2012). Hence, for social entrepreneurs, the underlying drive is ‘to create social value’ and the bottom line is to maximize some form of social impact, usually by addressing a social need that is being ignored by other institutions (McMullen, 2011). In contrast, for business entrepreneurs the bottom line is to maximize profits or shareholder value (Shaw & Carter, 2007). Entrepreneurship scholars have a diversity of models in terms of what constitutes social entrepreneurial processes (Phan, Kickul, Bacq, & Nordqvist, 2014). However, many scholars agree that the concept of opportunity recognition is at the core of the entrepreneurial process and serves as an entry point for any discussion about entrepreneurship processes (Austin et al., 2006; Weerawardena & Mort, 2006), with some scholars regarding opportunity recognition as the basis of entrepreneurship (Shane & Venkataraman, 2000). An opportunity represents the chance to meet a market need and deliver superior value

2

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP …

23

through a creative combination of resources. Shane and Venkataraman (2000, p. 218) define entrepreneurship as the process through which ‘opportunities to create future goods and services are discovered, evaluated and exploited’. As a result, the field of entrepreneurship involves the study of sources of opportunities and the processes of discovery, evaluation and exploitation of opportunities. Similarly, the academic literature on social entrepreneurship finds that social entrepreneurs use some of the same entrepreneurial activities to achieve their social mission and create social value (Nicholls, 2006), although these activities differ somewhat from traditional entrepreneurship. Analogously, opportunity recognition and exploitation are vital attributes of social entrepreneurship. Dees, Emerson, and Economy (2002) point out that social entrepreneurs see opportunities where others see problems. Others argue that opportunities in social entrepreneurship are different from their profit counterparts (Austin et al. 2006, Mair & Noboa, 2006). For example, social ventures are often placed between the civil society, the state and the market, and that this influences the opportunity recognition, with input from all three perspectives (Lehner & Kansikas, 2012). Opportunities arise from social needs and problems and result in social value, rather than personal or shareholder wealth as is the case with mainstream entrepreneurship (Grieco, 2015). BUA, a national lending service for sports and leisure equipment in Norway, is a good example of social entrepreneurship in that it provides a greater access to sport and is environmentally friendly (as it encourages less consumption). This social venture was established by three social entrepreneurs who saw an opportunity to improve health related to socioeconomic status in combination with the needs of young people who are considered inactive (BUA, n.d.). BUA provides a so-called ‘library solution’, where all children and youth, regardless of their socioeconomic status, have an opportunity to participate in organized and unorganized activities with their peers on a regular basis by borrowing sports and activity equipment for free. Shaw and Carter (2007) note that the kinds of opportunities that BUA addresses are social, community or public needs that have not been met by other institutions. In the case of BUA, the lending services are usually run by municipalities or local charities in Norway. As the majority do not operate in a sustainable and economic way, BUA’s ambition has been to unite the existing and new lending facilities under one umbrella organization and develop a business model that enables local BUA’s to

24

M. KOSMYNIN AND E. C. LJUNGGREN

be sustainable. One of the important distinctions is the social nature of the opportunities that social entrepreneurs recognize and pursue. Although there are many similarities in the processes associated with the entrepreneurial activities in both forms of entrepreneurship, there are also several differences when it comes to opportunities and motivations (Yitshaki & Kropp, 2015). For example, Monllor and Attaran (2008) point out that the main difference between the opportunity recognition of social entrepreneurs and for-profit entrepreneurs is their motivation. Social entrepreneurs are more motivated to fulfil a societal need, whereas commercial entrepreneurs strive for personal gain, achievement and autonomy (Monllor & Attaran, 2008; Shaw & Carter, 2007). BUA’s pursuit of opportunity is motivated by the need to help children and young people to be physically active. In addition to opportunity recognition, resource mobilization is a critical step in the entrepreneurial process. Mobilizing resources to exploit opportunities is not just about finding financial assets, but also includes the ability to deliver a social mission (Dees, 2001). Several studies (Desa, 2012; Di Domenico, Haugh, & Tracey, 2010; Meyskens, Robb–Post, Stamp, Carsrud, & Reynolds, 2010) have explored resource mobilization in social entrepreneurship. It is more difficult to mobilize entrepreneurial resources, such as human and financial resources, in social entrepreneurship than in its commercial counterpart (Desa, 2012). The reason for this is that social ventures primarily seek to generate social value (Dees, 2001) and because social entrepreneurship often takes place in resourceconstrained environments (Di Domenico et al., 2010). Hence, this could illustrate the difficulty of applying a theoretical apparatus in which ‘the market’ is a crucial concept to a context where the market mechanisms are more or less lacking. Although social entrepreneurs operate in a range of contexts, they are mostly associated with a limited access to resources (Peredo & McLean, 2006) and offering products or services to ‘users’ who are unable to pay for them. Resource constraints result in innovative ways of using the existing resources and acquiring new ones in order to generate social outcomes and achieve financial sustainability. According to Di Domenico et al. (2010), this is the distinctive nature of the resource constraints that social entrepreneurs face. While most entrepreneurs operate under conditions of resource scarcity, social entrepreneurs face challenges in assembling resources, mainly because they purposefully locate their activities in areas characterized by a scarcity of such, e.g. where institutions and markets function poorly. Hence, the

2

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP …

25

failure of markets and governments to deliver services can be regarded as an institutional void that social entrepreneurs aim to fill (Kosmynin, 2017; Mair & Martí, 2006). In the entrepreneurship literature, the process of bricolage has been used to analyze entrepreneurship in resource-scarce environments (Baker & Nelson, 2005). Baker and Nelson (2005, p. 33) investigated the process of ‘making do’ by applying a combination of resources to new problems and opportunities. They suggest that entrepreneurial bricolage takes place when entrepreneurs embedded in resource-constrained environments recombine the elements that are at hand for new purposes and in doing so exploit opportunities that other firms have rejected or overlooked (Baker & Nelson, 2005). In an attempt to build social entrepreneurship theory by applying bricolage theory, Di Domenico et al. (2010) studied how social entrepreneurs acquired resources in a resourcescarce environment. Their findings support the importance of making do and not being constrained by limitations and improvisation in social entrepreneurship. They suggest three more constructs of social value creation, stakeholder participation and persuasion. Based on the findings of the study, they propose a new conceptual framework of ‘social bricolage’ for social entrepreneurship that is distinct from other forms of bricolage (Di Domenico et al., 2010). Resource mobilization through bricolage serves as a legitimation process that allows the social venture to gain access to institutional support. Research on social entrepreneurship (de Bruin, Shaw, & Lewis, 2017; Shaw & Carter, 2007, Smeets, 2017) also stresses the importance of networking and collaboration for access to resources in the process of social value creation. Given the demanding social needs that are often addressed by social entrepreneurs, collaboration and networking are perceived as imperative for social entrepreneurship in developing legitimacy and credibility, especially locally, in order to encourage the community to support their activities and acquire resources (de Bruin & Lewis, 2015). This issue has been raised in the literature on social innovation in sport (Bjärsholm, 2018), but needs more research attention. Social entrepreneurship is closely linked to the other concept addressed in the chapter: social innovation (Groot & Dankbaar, 2014). As being innovative is part-and-parcel of social entrepreneurship, it can be seen as a subset of social innovation—the organizational enactment of socially innovative ideas and models. Social entrepreneurs and social ventures are potential tools for generating social innovation. It is the social

26

M. KOSMYNIN AND E. C. LJUNGGREN

entrepreneurs who, often jointly with other actors, ‘invent’ social innovations (see e.g. Phillips, Lee, Ghobadian, O’Regan, & James, 2014), whether this be new ideas, new products or new services, regardless of any social impact intended by the inventor. Hence, in the next section we address what the ‘social’ in social innovation consists of and how it relates to social innovation in sport.

The ‘Social’ Dimension of Social Innovation The social dimensions of innovation have gained appeal in the innovation discourse and research over the last decade (Maclean, Harvey, & Gordon, 2013; Van der Have & Rubalcaba, 2016). When looking at the key literature on the conceptualization of social innovation, it is apparent that a multitude of attributes (Howaldt & Schwarz, 2010; Svensson & Hambrick, 2019) are associated with the ‘social’ and that social innovation is complex and multi-faceted (Pol & Ville, 2009). We find that ‘social’ is mainly equated with ‘improvement’ (Phills, Deiglmeier, & Miller, 2008), new social processes or new outcomes, finding better answers to basic needs and more satisfying social relations (Moulaert, MacCallum, Mehmood, & Hamdouch, 2013; Nicholls & Murdoch, 2012) and a range of other ‘good things’. Thus, in order to define social innovation as a theoretical perspective and empirical research field, it is necessary to understand what the adjective ‘social’ refers to when qualifying an innovation. As noted in Chapter 1 in this book, there are many definitions of social innovation. For instance, social innovation can simply be seen as ‘new ideas that address unmet social needs – and that work’ (Nicholls, Simon, & Gabriel, 2015). However, in practice social innovation can take different shapes and form of specific ideas, models, processes, regulations and new organizational forms (Foroudi, Akarsu, Marvi, & Balakrishnan, 2020). Nicholls and Murdoch (2012) note that there are two interlinked conceptualizations of social innovation: one focusing on new social processes (e.g. mobilizing actors) leading to innovation and one on new social outputs and outcomes (e.g. new and improved means of collaborative action, new institutions and practices and the empowerment of certain groups of people). Social innovations are social in their ends and means (Murray, Caulier-Grice, & Mulgan, 2010). The first approach emphasizes changes in social relations and conditions and often focuses on rebalancing the power disparities of economic inequalities (Nicholls

2

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP …

27

& Murdoch, 2012). Therefore, social innovation is about social inclusion and refers to an ethical position of social justice. Social processes can refer to collaboration, the application of open source technologies and the reciprocal use of networks. Particularly successful forms of social innovation, which to many people represent ‘iconic examples’, include microfinance and Wikipedia. In contrast, definitions stressing the ‘outcome’ dimension emphasize the importance of the result of social innovation and see it as the answer to social market failures, but pay little or no attention to the process that has led to this outcome. In these conceptualizations, social justice or emancipatory outcomes, such as the improvement of human well-being or the inclusion of excluded groups or individuals are not implicit but explicit in the process of differentiating social innovation from other types of innovation. Sport is used to promote inclusion and/or help people who are on the margins of society. For example, the Norwegian Cyclists’ Association’s approach has a clear focus on the outcomes: the inclusion of women from minority backgrounds and health equity. In this context, social innovation needs to go beyond specific needs and aim for social value based on aspirations and the creation of new meanings (Phills et al., 2008). This can be exemplified by street football, where the intended outcome of playing street football is the creation of meaning and well-being of the homeless, drug users and newly released prisoners. A very prominent conceptualization of social innovation that focuses on the outcome comes from Phills et al. (2008, p. 36). This clearly differentiates social innovation from other forms of innovation and emphasizes improvement rather than change as a central feature. For them, a social innovation is ‘a novel solution to a social problem that is more effective, efficient, sustainable, or just than existing solutions and for which the value created accrues primarily to society as a whole rather than private individuals’ (Phills et al., 2008, p. 36). In this sense, social innovation can be a new product, service, production process or technology, but can also be a social movement, an intervention, changes in attitudes and norms or some combination of those (Foroudi et al., 2020; Phills et al., 2008). This definition builds on the innovation types introduced by Schumpeter (Schmitz, 2015). In this setting, social innovation can be seen as the answer to social market failures in the provision of certain goods. By conceptualizing social innovation as a more efficient, effective and sustainable solution, it is seen as an increasingly prevalent positive thing (Fougère et al., 2017). However, where there is change, there are winners

28

M. KOSMYNIN AND E. C. LJUNGGREN

and losers (Schmitz, 2015). The normative assumptions tend to obscure the dark sides of the phenomenon, such as a potential failure. Hence, it should also be acknowledged that social innovation is not always, in and of itself, a socially positive thing and may have dark sides to it. For example, it may have unintended consequences, such as excluding some groups from social goods or services and including others. The social value that is created through social innovation is also emphasized by scholars who define ‘social’ by focusing on the intention to meet social needs (Mulgan et al., 2007): ‘whereby value created accrues primarily to society as a whole rather than to private individuals’ (Phills et al., 2008, p. 36). Hence, in this case, the ‘social’ denotes that the intention of social innovation is to meet pressing social needs and improve well-being. It can be argued that most innovations create different benefits for society or some kind of social value, primarily by increasing employment, productivity and economic growth. However, the notion of ‘social’ value creation over private value creation (e.g. gains for entrepreneurs, investors etc.) is considered to be the core mission of any social innovation, and also that the benefits that social innovation brings to disadvantaged groups in society or to society as a whole should go beyond the private gain and profit maximization that motivates traditional market activity (Mulgan et al., 2007). Looked at from this perspective, a social innovation does not necessarily only need to manifest itself at the level of social interaction and social practice, but can be as tangible as a new product or a new technology (Choi & Majumdar, 2015), e.g. Nikes’ sports hijab. However, Schmitz (2015) notes that even though all the definitions have limitations, they help to clarify the term social innovation. In his analysis of the existing definitions, Schmitz (2015) argues that a strong social innovation needs to be social in terms of inputs, means, outputs and outcomes. This approach does not mean that innovations that are social in only one or two dimensions cannot be regarded as social innovations, but that they are weaker types of social innovation. Thus, a combination of all four dimensions leads to a stronger and more comprehensive definition of social innovation. Moreover, one of the distinct features of social innovation is that it involves all sectors of society, i.e. public, private and civil society actors (Nicholls & Murdock, 2012; Phills et al., 2008). Social innovation develops from the dynamic interplay of stakeholders on a particular issue in the public sector, in the non-profit sector and also in the

2

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP …

29

private sector. It can result from actions undertaken by public authorities and political actors and include private profit and non-profit initiatives. Edwards-Schachter, Matti, and Alcántara (2012) reinforce this notion by viewing the participation and collaboration of different actors from different sectors as a crucial aspect of social innovation. The collaborative nature of social innovation is also highlighted by Caulier-Grice, Patrick, and Norman (2012, p. 21): ‘social innovations are often inclusive and engage a wide range of actors ’. Partnership and collaborative arrangements between the sectors are important factors when it comes to realizing the full potential of social innovation. Consequently, social innovations can arise as a result of interactions between different actors operating within the same social system and developed through collective learning (Neumeier, 2012). The different understandings of social innovation are not necessarily mutually exclusive; they may simply put different emphases on specific aspects of the concept. Although the diversity of conceptualizations creates ambiguity in the use of the term, it also connects different approaches and disciplines associated with each conceptualization. Moreover, many conceptualizations of social innovation have explicit or hidden normative assumptions that obscure the dark side of the phenomenon: the failures, the conflicts and the oppression of universalistic approaches.

Conclusion In this conceptual chapter we have examined the concept of social innovation and the closely related concept of social entrepreneurship and the relevance of both in the sports context. This is important, as applying a theoretical apparatus where ‘the market’ is a crucial concept to a context in which market mechanisms are more or less lacking requires certain considerations. The sport context is heterogenous and characterized by belonging to both for-profit and non-profit markets. For instance, Manchester United football club is in a highly competitive international for-profit ‘entertainment’ market, while the regional football club Bodø/Glimt could be described as belonging to both the national forprofit ‘entertainment market’ and the local non-profit children’s football activities, which can be regarded as social, and a street football club that is a strictly non-profit activity. Hence, social innovation and social entrepreneurship can pave the way for more non-profit interests to play a role in the sports industry and have beneficial societal consequences

30

M. KOSMYNIN AND E. C. LJUNGGREN

in terms of social value creation—social values that are in most cases in line with the values of sport. Thus, it is essential for sports organizations to incorporate more social entrepreneurship activities, because this can help them to realize their basic values, such as health, playfulness, social inclusion etc. When reviewing the literature on social entrepreneurship we find a combination of entrepreneurship and social mission, in that social entrepreneurs exhibit entrepreneurial behaviour, including opportunity recognition, resource mobilization and so on to create social value and bring about social change. Social entrepreneurship research suggests that although differences exist between the primary mission and outputs of social and commercial entrepreneurship, many of the underlying inputs, processes and characteristics are similar. Regarding social entrepreneurship, one of the important distinctions is the social nature of the opportunities that social entrepreneurs recognize and pursue. The opportunities in ‘social markets’ are almost infinite, e.g. the UN’s sustainability development goals, whereas in for-profit organizations opportunities may be more difficult to reveal and exploit. The example with BUA shows how social entrepreneurship’s resource mobilization is accomplished by networking and collaboration. BUA’s business model required funding from other organizations in the establishment phase, but is now run by volunteers. Social innovations in sport are important and return ‘value’ to society and its citizens. Sports activities contribute to evening out social injustice, as seen with the example of bicycle courses for immigrant women that enable them to become mobile and exercise at the same time. For drug abusers, playing street football creates meaning and well-being and is a place to gather without drugs—a normality. There are a number of interesting lines of inquiry for future research. We suggest that further research should look more closely into the collaborative practices that enable social innovations in sport (cf. Bjärsholm, 2018). Collaborations between social enterprises and the public sector can be beneficial for both parties, as they often share the common goal of solving social problems. However, the knowledge gap is substantial: Where do the ideas emerge from, how do social entrepreneurs in sport manoeuvre to gain access to resources and find acceptance for their ideas? Whose needs are put forward, and by whom? There is also a need to investigate the theoretical avenues that this line of research could benefit from.

2

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP …

31

References Austin, J., Stevenson, H., & Wei-Skillern, J. (2006). Social and commercial entrepreneurship: Same, different, or both? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2006.00107.x. Austin, J., Stevenson, H., & Wei-Skillern, J. (2012). Social and commercial entrepreneurship: Same, different, or both? Revista De Administração, 47 (3), 370–384. Baker, T., & Nelson, R. (2005). Creating something from nothing: Resource construction through entrepreneurial bricolage. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(3), 329–366. Bartels, K. (2017). The double bind of social innovation: Relational dynamics of change and resistance in neighbourhood governance. Urban Studies, 54(16), 3789–3805. Bjärsholm, D. (2017). Sport and social entrepreneurship: A review of a concept in progress. Journal of Sport Management, 31(2), 191–206. Bjärsholm, D. (2018). Networking as a cornerstone within the practice of social entrepreneurship in sport. European Sport Management Quarterly, 19(1), 1– 18. BUA. (n.d.). Om oss. Accessed 3 May 2020 from https://www.bua.io/artikkel/ om-oss. Cajaiba-Santana, G. (2014). Social innovation: Moving the field forward. A conceptual framework. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 82(1), 42–51. Caulier-Grice, D. J., Patrick, A., & Norman, R. (2012). Defining social innovation. A deliverable of the project: “The theoretical, empirical and policy foundations for building social innovation in Europe” (TEPSIE), European Commission – 7th Framework Programme [online]. Brussels: European Commission. Available at https://iupe.files.wordpress.com/2015/11/tepsieresearch_report_final_web.pdf. Accessed 4 April 2017. Choi, N., & Majumdar, S. (2015). Social innovation: Towards a conceptualisation. In S. Majumdar, S. Guha, & N. Marakkath (Eds.), Technology and innovation for social change. New Delhi: Springer. Corner, P., & Ho, M. (2010). How opportunities develop in social entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(4), 635–659. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00382.x. Dacin, M., Dacin, P., & Tracey, P. (2011). Social entrepreneurship: A critique and future directions. Organization Science, 22(5), 1203–1213. https://doi. org/10.1287/orsc.1100.0620. de Bruin, A., & Lewis, K. V. (2015). Traversing the terrain of context in social entrepreneurship. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 6(2), 127–136. de Bruin, A., Shaw, E., & Lewis, K. V. (2017). The collaborative dynamic in social entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 29(7–8),

32

M. KOSMYNIN AND E. C. LJUNGGREN

575–585. https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:entreg:v:29:y:2017:i:7-8: p:575-585. Dees, J. G. (2001). Social entrepreneurship: mobilizing resources for success. Retrieved from https://www.tgci.com/sites/default/files/pdf/Social%20E ntrepreneurship_1.pdf. Dees, J. G., Emerson, J., & Economy, P. (2002). Editor’s introduction. In J. G. Dees, J. Emerson, & P. Economy (Eds.), Strategic tools for social entrepreneurs: Enhancing the Performance of your enterprising nonprofit. New York: Wiley. Desa, G. (2012). Resource mobilization in international social entrepreneurship: Bricolage as a mechanism of institutional transformation. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 36(4), 727–751. Di Domenico, M., Haugh, H., & Tracey, P. (2010). Social bricolage: Theorizing social value creation in social enterprises. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(4), 681–703. Doherty, T., Horne, T., & Wootton, S. (2014). Managing public services Implementing changes (1st ed.). Hoboken: Taylor and Francis. Edwards-Schachter, M. E., Matti, C. E., & Alcántara, E. (2012). Social innovation and living labs. Review of Policy Research, 29, 672–692. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1541-1338.2012.00588.x. Foroudi, P., Akarsu, T., Marvi, R., & Balakrishnan, J. (2020). Intellectual evolution of social innovation: A bibliometric analysis and avenues for future research trends. Industrial Marketing Management. Fougère, M., Segercrantz, B., & Seeck, H. (2017). A critical reading of the European Union’s social innovation policy discourse: (Re)legitimizing neoliberalism. Organization, 24(6), 819–843. Grieco, C. (2015). Conceptualizing social entrepreneurship where we are and how to move forward. In C. Grieco (Ed.), Assessing social impact of social enterprises. Springer. Groot, A., & Dankbaar, B. (2014). Does social innovation require social entrepreneurship? Technology Innovation Management Review, 4(12), 17–26. Howaldt, J., Kaletka, C., & Schröder, A. (2016). Social entrepreneurs: Important actors within an ecosystem of social innovation. European Public & Social Innovation Review, 1(2), 95–110. Howaldt, J., & Schwarz, M. (2010). Social innovation: Concepts, research fields and international trends. Retrieved 25 August 2019, from http://www.asp rea.org/imagenes/IMO%20Trendstudie_Howaldt_englisch_Final%20ds.pdf. Kibler, E., Salmivaara, V., Stenholm, P., & Terjesen, S. (2018). The evaluative legitimacy of social entrepreneurship in capitalist welfare systems. Journal of World Business, 53(6), 944–957. Kobro, L., Andersen, L. L., Hygum Espersen, H., Kristensen, K., Skar, C., Iversen, H., & Kobro, L. (Ed.). (2018). Let’s do it together! Handbook for

2

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP …

33

local collaborative social innovation. Norge: Høgskolen i Sørøst-Norge/Senter for sosialt entreprenørskap og samskapende sosial innovasjon. Kosmynin, M. (2017). Social innovation as a response to institutional voids in a northern context – a study from the Murmansk region (Master’s thesis). Nord University. Lehner, O., & Kansikas, J. (2012). Opportunity recognition in social entrepreneurship. The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 21(1), 25–58. https://doi. org/10.1177/097135571102100102. Maclean, M., Harvey, C., & Gordon, J. (2013). Social innovation, social entrepreneurship and the practice of contemporary entrepreneurial philanthropy. International Small Business Journal, 31(7), 747–763. Mair, J., & Martí, I. (2006). Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight. Journal of World Business, 41(1), 36–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2005.09.002. Mair, J., & Noboa, E. (2006). How intentions to create a social venture are formed: A case study. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ ssrn.875589. Mcmullen, J. (2011). Delineating the domain of development entrepreneurship: A market-based approach to facilitating inclusive economic growth. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(1), 185–215. Meyskens, M., Robb-Post, C., Stamp, J., Carsrud, A., & Reynolds, P. (2010). Social ventures from a resource-based perspective: An exploratory study assessing global Ashoka fellows. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(4), 661–680. Monllor, J., & Attaran, S. (2008). Opportunity recognition of social entrepreneurs: An application of the creativity model. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 6(1), 54. https://doi.org/10.1504/ ijesb.2008.017389. Montessori, N. (2016). A theoretical and methodological approach to social entrepreneurship as world-making and emancipation: Social change as a projection in space and time. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development: Institutionalization of Entrepreneurship Research, 28(7–8), 536–562. Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., Mehmood, A., & Hamdouch, A. (Eds.). (2013). The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Mulgan, G., Tucker, S., Rushanara, A., & Sanders, B. (2007). Social Innovation. What it is, why it matters and how it can be accelerated. The Young Foundation Working Paper, Skoll Centre for Social Entrepreneurship, Said Business School, University of Oxford. Retrieved 20 November 2017 at http://eur eka.sbs.ox.ac.uk/761/1/Social_Innovation.pdf.

34

M. KOSMYNIN AND E. C. LJUNGGREN

Muñoz, S., & Tinsley, S. (2008). Selling to the public sector: Prospects and problems for social enterprise in the UK. The Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 32, 43–62. Murray, R., Caulier-Grice, J., & Mulgan, G. (2010). The open book of social innovation. London: National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Art. Neumeier, S. (2012). Why do social innovations in rural development matter and should they be considered more seriously in rural development research? – Proposal for a stronger focus on social innovations in rural development research. Sociologia Ruralis, 52(1), 48–69. Nicholls, A. (2006). Social entrepreneurship: New models of sustainable social change. Oxford University Press. Nicholls, A., & Murdock, A. (2012). Social innovation: Blurring boundaries to reconfigure markets. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Nicholls, A., Simon, J., & Gabriel, M. (2015). New frontiers in social innovation research. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. NIF. (2019). Idretten vil! Langtidsplan for norsk idrett 2019–2023. Accessed 3 May 2020 from https://www.idrettsforbundet.no/om-nif/idretten-vil-20192023/. Peredo, A. M., & McLean, M. (2006). Social entrepreneurship: A critical review of the concept. Journal of World Business, 41, 56–65. Peterson, T., & Schenker, K. (2018). Social entrepreneurship in a sport policy context. Sport in Society, 21(3), 452–467. Phan, P., Kickul, J., Bacq, S. & Nordqvist, M. (2014). Theory and empirical research in social entrepreneurship. The Johns Hopkins University Series on Entrepreneurship. Edward Elgar Publishing. Phillips, W., Lee, H., Ghobadian, A., O’Regan, N., & James, P. (2014). Social innovation and social entrepreneurship. Group and Organization Management, 40(3), 428–461. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601114560063. Phills, J. A., Deiglmeier, K., & Miller, D. T. (2008). Rediscovering social innovation. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 6(4), 34–43. Pol, E., & Ville, S. (2009). Social innovation: Buzz word or enduring term? Journal of Socio-Economics, 38(6), 878–885. Ratten, V. (2019a). Sports technology and innovation: Assessing cultural and social factors. Palgrave Macmillan. Ratten, V. (2019b). Social innovation in sport: The creation of Santa Cruz as a world surfing reserve. International Journal of Innovation Science, 11(1), 20–30. Reid, G. (2017). A fairytale narrative for community sport? Exploring the politics of sport social enterprise. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics: Entrepreneurial Sport Policy, 9(4), 597–611.

2

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP …

35

Schmitz, B. (2015). Social entrepreneurship, social innovation, and social mission organizations: toward a conceptualization. In R. Cnaan & D. Vinokur-Kaplan (Eds.), Cases in innovative nonprofits: Organizations that make a difference (pp. 17–42). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/978148 3398082.n4. Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217–226. https:// doi.org/10.5465/amr.2000.2791611. Shaw, E., & Carter, S. (2007). Social entrepreneurship: Theoretical antecedents and empirical analysis of entrepreneurial processes and outcomes. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 14(3), 418–434. Shaw, E., & De Bruin, A. (2013). Reconsidering capitalism: The promise of social innovation and social entrepreneurship? International Small Business Journal, 31(7), 737–746. Smeets, D. (2017). Collaborative learning processes in social impact bonds: A case study from the Netherlands. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 8(1), 67–87. Svensson, P., & Hambrick, M. (2019). Exploring how external stakeholders shape social innovation in sport for development and peace. Sport Management Review, 22(4), 540–552. Swedberg, R. (2000). Entrepreneurship: The social science view. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Van Der Have, R. P., & Rubalcaba, L. (2016). Social innovation research: An emerging area of innovation studies? Research Policy, 45(9), 1923–1935. Weerawardena, J., & Sullivan Mort, G. (2006). Investigating social entrepreneurship: A multidimensional model. Journal of World Business, 41(1), 21–35. Yitshaki, R., & Kropp, F. (2015). Motivations and opportunity recognition of social entrepreneurs. Journal of Small Business Management, 54(2), 546–565. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12157.

CHAPTER 3

Social Innovations and Social Entrepreneurship in Sport Katarina Schenker, Tomas Peterson, and Daniel Bjärsholm

Introduction In this chapter we present a theoretical understanding of sports and social entrepreneurship and discuss its relation to the concept of social innovation. The chapter is a theoretical contribution, however, our understanding has been informed by empirical studies, literature reviews and ongoing academic collaborations, presentations, debates and discussions over the last decade.

K. Schenker (B) Faculty of Social Science, Linnaeus University, Växjö, Sweden e-mail: [email protected] T. Peterson Department of Sport Sciences, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden e-mail: [email protected] D. Bjärsholm Department of Sport Science, Linnaeus University, Växjö, Sweden e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 A. Tjønndal (ed.), Social Innovation in Sport, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63765-1_3

37

38

K. SCHENKER ET AL.

The national sports federations in the Scandinavian countries originate from the beginning of the twentieth century, which means that they are over a century old. The traditional form of organizing sports clubs has been based on voluntary work within the voluntary sector of society (Bergsgard & Norberg, 2010). One precondition for a voluntary organization is that it is open to everyone regardless of age, sex, social and ethnic affiliation, physical and mental condition, or place of residence. The sports movement is thereby a social educative and fostering movement that builds on people’s social engagement (e.g. Giulianotti, Itkonen, Nevala, & Salmikangas, 2017; SOU 2008:59). The fostering elements include norms of conduct that are valid and accepted in the Scandinavian countries. They include being part of a group, contributing to and strengthening the group, but also trusting that the group will be supportive. This way of organizing has been recognized by some as a special Scandinavian/Nordic model that is characterized by, for example, a comprehensive public support on welfare policy grounds and its many participants (e.g. Giulianotti et al., 2017; Norberg, 2018). By contextualising social innovations in a sport policy context, more specifically the Swedish context, the purpose of this chapter is to outline the concepts of social entrepreneurship and social innovations in order to better understand and discuss their relations to each other. On the one hand, a contextualization may make the definition hard to use in other national sport policy contexts, on the other hand, similar methodological approaches made in other national contexts have the potential to collectively enrich the international field of sports science. We have evaluated two political reforms in which the overall aim is to recruit more young people into sports clubs. These political reforms were developed and initiated by the Swedish government and called “The Handshake” (2004–2007) (Gerrevall 2007; Peterson, 2007; SOU 2008:59) and “The Lift for Sport” (2008–) (Gerrevall, Fahlström, Hedberg, & Linnér, 2012; Hedenborg, Jonasson, Peterson, Schenker, & Tolvhed, 2012b). In this chapter, we briefly introduce the context of the Swedish sports policy in Sweden, thereafter four political reforms are introduced, two of which we have evaluated. The reforms are understood as social innovations introduced by the government, that mainly were handed over to the special sports federations and the sports clubs to handle. But in traditional bureaucratic structures, as in the sports movement’s, social innovations like these can only be managed in traditional ways. We have seen, however, that social entrepreneurs may gain from the political reforms and possibly develop solutions to specific problems, or at least

3

SOCIAL INNOVATIONS AND SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN SPORT

39

raise awareness about them in society in general and in the sports movement in particular (see Peterson & Schenker, 2015; Santos, 2012). As the political reforms can be understood as social innovations (see Reynolds, Gabriel, & Heales, 2017), we discuss the relation between the concepts of social sports entrepreneurship and social innovation and the differences in the concepts are outlined in the form of two notions. The theoretical understanding of sports and social entrepreneurship presented in this chapter is developed over the years and originates from the evaluations and the data collected in a research project on social entrepreneurship and sports (Peterson & Schenker, 2018).

A Contextualisation of the Sports Movement and Sport Policy in Sweden The sports movement and sport policy in Sweden are characterised by three things. First, the voluntarily organised sports movement is, with its 3.1 million individual members who are active in at least one of the approximately 20,000 local sports clubs, a major player in the non-profit sector. Its roots from several popular movements have formed the democratic ideals and values, such as openness and equality, on which the sports movement rests. Secondly, the sports movement receives comprehensive government support on welfare policy grounds (e.g., democratic fostering, equality, social integration and public health). Since the government regards the sports movement as an important provider of welfare, the movement is considered worthy of its extensive support. Finally, there has been a close cooperation between the state and the sports movement. This has, among other things, been expressed by the fact that the sports movement, not only been the recipient of government support, but also had a central role in the allocation and administration of the support (see Norberg, 2018). However, since the turn of the millennium, there have been some changes in Swedish sport. As in the rest of the world (Misener & Misener, 2017), the way of organising sports has been increasingly challenged by other forms of organisation. This has, for instance, led to reduced voluntariness and more commercial and/or individualistic relations. The advantages with a business-like model are that activities can be offered around the clock, with state-of-the-art equipment and professional services, and do not require its participants or customers to engage in the running of the organisation. On the other hand, some people

40

K. SCHENKER ET AL.

are excluded, for example, due to high participation fees. This development has created competition between the traditional sports club and the commercial sports organization in attracting people who are interested in sport and physical activity. Despite these competing organisational forms, there are signs that the people who are involved in both forms (i.e. voluntary and/or commercial sports) also are interested in other alternative ways of organizing sports. These new forms can either be completely new or an organizational hybrid featuring elements from both sides (Misener & Misener, 2017). Other important changes in Sweden with regards to its sport policy is that the support to sports has increased significantly and that the sport policy objectives have been revised and more explicitly formulated since the new millennium (Norberg, 2016, 2018; SOU 2008:59). Much of the increased support can be explained by some political reforms, such as the aforementioned Handshake and the Lift for sport, which can be classified as large-scale development initiatives that were both time limited and earmarked. The aims of the reforms and initiatives have explicitly been of a social character. As illustrated above, the Swedish sports movement represents a major social force in society, and the government considers the movement to be so important that it is worthy of support. However, there is a growing critique of what the sports movement is actually able to accomplish (e.g. Coalter, 2007; SOU 2008:59). In fact, this critique can also be seen in the changed Swedish sport policy. The number of members and participants has decreased over the last 15 years. Also, there are reports of increasing high participation fees and children and youth being treated as elite prospects, which threatens their right to a childhood free from the demands associated with the adult elite sport (Norberg, 2015). By introducing political reforms in form of earmarked and time limited initiatives with social connotations, the government can indirectly be said to criticize the sports movement of not doing what it is supposed to do based on the objectives of the state support; that is, the sports movement’s contribution to public health, democratic fostering, social integration and equality. In sum, this critique has been indirectly formulated by the Swedish government via its sport policy (Bjärsholm, 2020). Another form of criticism against both the welfare system in general and the sport policy, in particular, comes from those referred to as social entrepreneurs (Peterson & Schenker, 2018). Their criticism implies that policies cannot provide people with sufficient opportunities to live,

3

SOCIAL INNOVATIONS AND SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN SPORT

41

engage in and strengthen democracy, due to illness, (un)employment, social background, ethnicity, various disabilities, or underpin issues of social justice (cf. Giulianotti et al., 2017). In fact, researchers advocate that social entrepreneurs come into being due to societal challenges (e.g., poverty, migration and inequality), or from the failure of institutions such as the government or the market (e.g., Huybrecht & Nicholls, 2012; Santos, 2012). But governments have, according to research (e.g., Dees, 2007; Mulgan, 2006; Nicholls, 2006), realised that social entrepreneurs can generate values and create social change more effectively than public services. As a result, governments have introduced various political reforms to both support social entrepreneurs in their various social quests, and create systems generating incentives for other non-governmental organisations to work on solving social problems (Santos, 2012). The political reforms can, in general, have two main roles in relation to social entrepreneurship, either as a policy for social innovation or as a policy that is socially innovative in itself (Reynolds et al., 2017).

Social Innovations in Sports in Sweden After 2000 The political reforms have sometimes been too challenging for the sports movement, especially in those cases when it cannot meet the demands by using its traditional organizational structure and traditional competitionbased activities, which by definition are excluding (Peterson & Schenker, 2018). As far as we understand it, what the government has encouraged and developed is social innovation. The implementation of such innovations has opened up for, and in some cases demanded, social entrepreneurship in sports. By developing and initiating reforms, governments can be important actors in social innovation systems in which social entrepreneurs work innovatively to achieve their social goals (Phillips, Lee, Ghobadian, O’Regan, & James, 2015; see also Baines, Bassi, Csoba, & Sipos, 2019; Ratten, 2017). The initiated policy reforms cannot only be described as social innovation in itself, they are also policies “for social innovation” (Reynolds et al., 2017, p. 3). Starting in 2003, in addition to its annual funding, the Swedish government has supported the sports movement with additional funding connected to reforms with specified social requirements for the outcomes. That is, with their extra grants aimed at supporting socially-oriented

42

K. SCHENKER ET AL.

projects in sports clubs, these reforms are examples of policies for social innovation. Through these innovative reforms, the intention is that the sports movement will become accessible to an increasing number of children and youth who, furthermore, will be expected to engage in the sports movement for longer periods of time. Despite the innovative approach, evaluations have shown that the social innovations, by way of routinization, professionalization and normalization, have increasingly become part of sports clubs’ usual activities (Hedenborg, Jonasson, Peterson, Schenker, & Tolvhed, 2012a). A major proportion of the grants has been allocated to clubs offering male-dominated team sports and to clubs in densely populated and socio-economically well-off municipalities (Åkesson, 2007; Wiren Åkesson & Norberg, 2012). The evaluations note that only a small number of projects have managed to activate children and youth by challenging the borders of traditional competitive sports. But, why is it so difficult to make social innovations work as they are intended? In order to answer that question, the governmentally supported social innovations need to be contextualized and we also need to understand the governing, managing, coordinating and perhaps scaffolding organizations for the operationalization of the social innovation. In the following section, we present four Swedish governmental reforms that have been implemented over the last 15 years that can be described as social innovations. A Handshake for the Children and the Youth of Sweden The Handshake programme (2004–2007) involved granting a total of 100 million Euros to the sports movement with the aim of recruiting new members, curtailing membership fees, promoting female participation in sports, fighting drugs and intensifying the cooperation with schools (Norberg, 2018). Overall, the evaluation of the Handshake showed that the sports movement did not become more open and accessible for those with no particular interest in sports. Even when it came to the collaboration between schools and sports clubs, a result was that sports seemed to have moved into schools without adaptation, which meant that they mostly reached pupils who were already taking part in sports. One of the main outcomes of the Handshake was that the funding had been used by sports clubs to make “more of the same” (Engström, 2008). When the Handshake was initiated, the sports movement had to create

3

SOCIAL INNOVATIONS AND SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN SPORT

43

extra bureaucracy in order to allocate the funding. They had to employ people to manage the administration, create routines calling for Handshake proposals, handle and evaluate applications from sports clubs and find ways of evaluating the funded Handshake projects and the Handshake organization. This was a major change and a huge apparatus for the special sports federations, the Swedish Sports Confederation and for clubs that had no previous experience of similar work. Consequently, this meant that the social innovation (i.e. the Handshake) created by the government for sports clubs to initiate social innovation projects was transformed into the traditional and ordinary practices that were already provided by the sports movement and its sports clubs. The Lift for Sport In 2008, the Handshake programme was replaced by a subsequent programme called ‘Lift for Sport’. This new initiative took over the Handshake organization, which by now had become more established and experienced. This programme amounted to 50 million Euros annually with the aim of recruiting more children to the sports movement and persuading more youngsters to continue engaging in sport as they grew older. In a research review, Stenling and Fahlén (2016) concluded that the Lift for Sport and the Handshake programme were not sufficient to change the clubs’ activities and orientations. Referring to Fahlén, Eliasson, and Wickman (2015) and Fahlén and Karp (2010), they argue that the forces of the existing ideas, norms and values in sports clubs were too strong, compared to the power of the additional grant from the government. Sports for the Newly Arrived in Sweden Between 2015 and 2020, 34 million Euros were earmarked for sports associations for the integration of the newly arrived in the wake of the European refugee crisis in order to increase the availability of the sports movement also for the newly arrived people (cf. Arnoldsson, 2019; Lundberg, 2017). This time, the Swedish Sports Confederation approached its district federations with a request to urgently take action and form a programme that was adjusted to the regional context, its challenges and possibilities. So far, the results show that the sports movement has had

44

K. SCHENKER ET AL.

difficulty adjusting to the young newly arrived who do not seem to fit into the traditional sporting practice (Carlman & Vikström, 2018). Uniting for Daily Movement ‘Uniting for daily movement’ is the most recent initiative in which the government collaborates with the Swedish Sports Federation, the Swedish School of Sport and Health Sciences, the Swedish Outdoor Association, the Swedish Teachers Union, the National Union of Teachers in Sweden and the Swedish Physical Education Teacher Association to form a network that aims to promote movement through more or less organized physical activity. The actions stipulated by the initiative are several. For example, the school subject of physical education and health is allocated 100 extra hours in the compulsory school. Additionally, the Swedish Sports Federation is requested to provide and promote, physical activity and sports during the school day, in collaboration with other national organizations and actors. Also, the initiative includes ways of spreading good examples, where the Swedish Outdoor Association supports school children’s physical activity (Government Offices of Sweden, 2017). This social initiative, including sports and the sports movement, is new and requires collaborations between actors who do not naturally meet or even share common interests. These four reforms can be described as social innovations that challenge the traditional organizational structures of the sports movement. The targets groups have not traditionally or normally been included in the sporting practices. We know that integration and inclusion processes can be approached in different ways. One way is to sustain the traditional practice by educating and, thereby, changing the target group to make it understand and appreciate the meaning of the practice. Another is to offer a desirable practice for the target group. This option may lead to two separate practices, one traditional and one tailored to the presumed needs of the target group. A third way is to renegotiate the norms of the practice in a way that includes the different groups (Alexander 2013; Gerrevall, Bjärsholm, & Linnér, 2018). Evaluations of and research on the Handshake and Lift for Sport have shown that the sports clubs tend to provide more of the same traditional activities or customized activities for the target group of the social engagement. As yet very little data is available on the effects of the two newer interventions, Sports for the Newly Arrived in Sweden and Uniting for Daily Movement, to be able to

3

SOCIAL INNOVATIONS AND SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN SPORT

45

discern whether their outcomes differ from those for the Handshake and Lift for Sport. However, based on what we do know, social innovations have not been implemented as they were intended. The sports movement has instead chosen not to challenge the organization, norms and values to any great extent. Dealing with social innovation implies a wish to change a practice. However, at the same time, it is difficult to make a change if the ordinary organizational structures are in use. We argue that some social innovations actually require new organizational structures if the outcomes are to be successful. At the same time, challenging the old structures’ entrepreneurial thinking is necessary.

Social Innovation Versus Social Entrepreneurship As the political reforms are understood as social innovations, in the following we discuss the relation between the concepts of social sports entrepreneurship and social innovation. The differences in the concepts are outlined in the form of two notions. The first argues that the concept of sports and social entrepreneurship could assist in understanding the organizational demands of social innovative reforms. Social innovation within sports can be regarded as political/organizational forms that could be based on social entrepreneurship as content. The second is that theories on social innovation generally lack actors’ characterizing notions, while our theory of social entrepreneurship leans heavily on the concept of the social entrepreneur (see also Galindo & Méndez-Picazo, 2013; Schumpeter, 1934). Overall, we argue that both concepts are often used inaccurately, are often confused with each other and that their meaning can be ambiguous. Based on our definition of social entrepreneurship, and compared to the existing definitions of social innovation (see Phillips et al., 2015; Phills, Deiglmeier, & Miller, 2008; Tjønndal, 2018a, 2018b), we conclude that in sports the social entrepreneur should be defined at an individual, organizational, general and economic level. Notion 1: Social innovation within sports can be regarded as a political/organizational form that could be based on social entrepreneurship as content. Some social innovations in sports can be created by political reforms that are decided on by the state or by other political bodies and promote inclusive activity, i.e. which relates to everyone regardless of age, sex, social and ethnic affiliation, physical and mental state, or place of residence. Social innovation as a political reform relates to a form, the

46

K. SCHENKER ET AL.

construction of which is both guaranteed and limited by a political body. The same does not apply to the form’s content or does so only in a general way. The most important reason for this is the relation between the political system and civil society in the Scandinavian countries. For example, in the 1930s, the Swedish government developed a system whereby the Swedish Sports Confederation became the recipient and, simultaneously, the deputy authority of state grants (Norberg, 2004, 2018). The aim was to promote various socially beneficial effects such as public health, the fostering of young people and integration, and at the same time strengthen the sports movement’s own non-profit endeavours as a popular voluntary movement in the borderlands between state, market and civil society. This has been characterized as an implicit contract between the state and the sports movement based on clear expectations of the social benefits of sports and its ability to shoulder social responsibility on its own initiative (Norberg, 2011; SOU 2008:59). We understand the four Swedish political reforms presented earlier as social innovations explicitly formulated by the government. When it comes to the content, these social innovations have mostly been filled with what could be called “more of the same”, which was not the intention, and to some degree with social entrepreneurship. In the first case, the result can be summarized as the sports clubs receiving more economic support for their ordinary activities. Social innovations are transformed into a reinforcement of the regular societal support to the sports movement. The Swedish clubs received the support, although in practice, and as part of the implicit contract, they used them for their ordinary activities. Projects that from the start were experiments that tested new ideas have after 16 years become yet another general support form for the sports movement (Hedenborg et al., 2012b). Consequently, the social objectives of the political reforms have not been successfully realised. But there have been—and still are—exceptions to this rule. A number of research projects (Gerrevall, 2007; Gerrevall et al., 2012; Hedenborg et al., 2012b; Peterson, 2008) have also studied and evaluated other forms of sporting activities; projects that challenge the accepted definition of sport. These include activities that engage everyone in the local community, projects that are directed towards unaccompanied refugee children, sport-like activities during school hours and swimming lessons free of charge for socio-economically disadvantaged families. Such activities are not in line with the regular activity of competitive sports. At the same

3

SOCIAL INNOVATIONS AND SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN SPORT

47

time, they involve sport look-alikes or sports-related activities that are not found elsewhere and that have a different background, organization and prerequisites than those provided by a traditional sports club. The concept of social entrepreneurship can be described in terms of three theses, here summarized and compared with the concept of social innovation (Peterson & Schenker, 2018). First, in a conflictual way, social entrepreneurship in sports is characterized by activities that cross the boundaries between the different sectors of society. The social innovation may be filled with social content that challenges and crosses societal boundaries, although this is not mandatory. However, on the other hand, challenging content is necessary if social innovation is to be reformative. Second, social entrepreneurship in sports makes use of sports and money (profit) as a means rather than a goal. Even though in this case the social innovation is a political reform, it does not define the procedures. Content such as sports entrepreneurship, traditional entrepreneurship, human resource management and pioneer work can be part of social innovation but is not commensurable with social entrepreneurship. These other forms cannot be characterized by all three theses simultaneously, i.e. they are either disqualified by not crossing the boundaries between different sectors of society, their means or their social goals. This leads us to the third thesis. What is inherently social in social entrepreneurship refers to normative goals. Ultimately, it is a matter of democracy, i.e. everyone should be able to be heard and to participate in society. Through the people’s movement, the sports movement has a democratic foundation and is regarded by the majority of its members as a fundamental part of the democracy in Sweden, both as a democratic fostering arena and as a platform for participation in society. This means that the market sector cannot define normative social content. A social innovation, like the described political reforms, may serve as a vitamin boost for renewing social practices, although it can also be seen as a criticism of a system with rigid structures that maintain old traditions, cultures and norms and offers a way to ease bottlenecks, as indicated above. Regardless of which view is taken, we argue that social innovations tend to require social entrepreneurs to carry them out and thereby avoid becoming a traditional part of ordinary activities. Notion 2: Theories of social innovation generally lack characterizing notions of the actors, while our theory of social entrepreneurship leans heavily on the concept of the social entrepreneur.

48

K. SCHENKER ET AL.

A reasonable question to ask is why we should use the concept of the entrepreneur when, for example, the term enthusiast has been used through the history of sports in Sweden? The main difference for us is that real enthusiasts are unlikely to cross boundaries. The raison d’être of social entrepreneurship differs from that of the enthusiast. The enthusiast maintains the traditions, cultures and norms through the management of the sports club. The social entrepreneur, on the other hand, creates new activities, even though they may use the traditions, cultures and norms as a means for social development in the entrepreneurial processes. Further, despite being engaged in social improvement, the enthusiast is likely to consider competitive sport as a goal, rather than as a means. Distinguishing between sports as a goal and sports as a means is like distinguishing between fostering democracy and competition. The enthusiast is driven by a love for the game. The key reason for using competitive sports as a means and not a goal is that competition is not inclusive, but exclusive, in that selection- and ranking processes are involved. However, in practice, we agree that people’s practices and engagements are not easily defined and that there are overlaps in cases and contexts (cf. Tjønndal, 2018a, 2018b). Social entrepreneurship is a rather new concept in academia and has become increasingly used in research in the last two decades (Bjärsholm, 2017, 2018; Short, Moss, & Lumpkin, 2009). Its origin can be partly understood in the light of an extended academic discussion about the concept of entrepreneurship. This extension has meant that the concept is no longer an exclusive phenomenon restricted to the field of economics and business administration, but can appear in all sectors of society. Both in a narrower and a wider perspective, entrepreneurship involves being innovative and creative, even though its goals may differ. In a wider perspective, the goal does not need to be economic profit but may relate to the fulfilment of social needs (Steyaert & Katz, 2004). Social entrepreneurship is one example of this extended view of the concept of entrepreneurship. The social mission is central to social entrepreneurship (Austin, Stevenson, & Wei-Skillern, 2006; Dees, 1998) in that it concerns contributing to societal well-being by using innovative methods to create and satisfy social values. Any economic profit that is made should be reinvested, wholly or largely, in the social entrepreneurial organization (Bacq & Janssen, 2011; Defourny & Nyssens, 2010). These two core values also represent the main difference between social and commercial entrepreneurship (see Light, 2008).

3

SOCIAL INNOVATIONS AND SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN SPORT

49

Although social entrepreneurship and social innovations are often mixed up and poorly formulated, the matter of definitions is important. In our view, the entrepreneur can be defined at an individual, organizational, general and economic level. At the individual level, the entrepreneur attributes personal characteristics like ‘energetic’, ‘creative’, ‘powerhouse’, ‘driving force’, ‘risk-taking’ and ‘hard working’. These attributes are important when trying to understand why some people are more willing than others to mobilize resources to exploit an identified opportunity (Shane & Venkataraman, 2000). It also means that entrepreneurs are not afraid of change, but search for new angles, create new businesses and organize the market in new ways. At the organizational level, entrepreneurship can be related to activities representing new forms of organization in the organizational realm between the various sectors of society. Social entrepreneurial activities challenge the boundaries between the state, the market and civil society (Peterson & Schenker, 2015). At the general (societal) level, an entrepreneur can be the executant of ‘creative destruction’ (Schumpeter, 1934) and a possible example of the subject of the Weberian process of the routinization of charisma— the other being the political entrepreneur (Weber, 1978). In both cases, the entrepreneur changes the world (the market or society itself). In a Schumpeterian sense, the entrepreneur is an agent of change who implements innovations. As outlined in Chapter 1 in this book, in this view innovation is understood as a new service, commodity or organisational form to which some sort of value can be linked. According to neo-classical economic theory, by introducing innovations the entrepreneur generates creative destruction by unbalancing supply and demand on the market. The consequence—chaotic markets—makes the entrepreneur a creator of new demands (Schumpeter, 1934). The routinization of charisma was Max Weber’s attempt at understanding human historical development as a cyclical movement, where charismatic figures change society by tearing up existing societal organizations and replacing them with their own. This new organization then solidifies (becomes routinized) and is eventually challenged by a new charismatic figure (Weber, 1978). In sum, to achieve social change in society, social innovations such as political reforms are not enough, social entrepreneurs are also needed, maybe even necessary. Especially considering that it is the social entrepreneurs who implement social innovations.

50

K. SCHENKER ET AL.

At the economic level, an entrepreneur can be associated with a small firm or a family firm and with simple commodity production (Fryklund & Peterson, 1981). The small firm can be related to two different forms of production—simple (or petty) commodity production and extended capitalist commodity production. Here we refer to sports and social entrepreneurship as social simple commodity production. In order to understand a way of thinking and acting that both represents ingenuity and a way of using money “as a means, not as a goal”, we need to anchor the analysis in economic theory. Simple commodity production can function without the need for extension of the small firm. Often, the small entrepreneur will prefer an activity that is transparent—in the form of the small firm or the family firm—rather than maximizing the volume and/or the profit. When it comes to simple social commodity production, social goods are the main goals. This is our understanding of social entrepreneurship in sports using money (profit) not as a goal, but as a means to meet the set social goals. This also separates social entrepreneurship in sports from other forms of content in social innovations.

Conclusions By contextualizing social innovations in a Swedish sport policy context, we have outlined the concepts of social entrepreneurship and social innovations in order to better understand and discuss their relations to each other. We presented four political reforms that can be understood as social innovations introduced by the government. But by handing over the responsibility to implement the reforms to the special sports federations and the sports clubs, the social innovations have not been implemented as originally intended. Instead, the sports movement has chosen not to challenge its organizational structure, norms and values to any great extent. We argue that some social innovations actually require new organizational structures if the outcomes are to be successful. At the same time, to challenge the old structures’, entrepreneurial thinking is necessary. In discussing the relation between the concepts of social sports entrepreneurship and social innovation, the differences in the concepts are outlined in the form of two notions. Social innovation within sports can be regarded as a political/organizational form that could be based

3

SOCIAL INNOVATIONS AND SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN SPORT

51

on social entrepreneurship as content. Generally, theories of social innovation lack characterizing notions of the actors, while our theory of social entrepreneurship leans heavily on the concept of the social entrepreneur.

References Åkesson, J. (2007). Var hamnade handslagspengarna? ”Stor” blev större och ”liten” kunde inte hänga med [Where did the Handshake money go]? Svensk Idrottsforskning, 3–4, 94–99. Alexander, J. C. (2013). Struggling over the mode of incorporation: Backlash against multiculturalism in Europe. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 34(4), 531– 556. Arnoldsson, J. (2019). Idrott för nyanlända 2015–2018. Stockholm: Riksidrottsförbundet. Austin, J., Stevenson, H., & Wei-Skillern, J. (2006). Social and commercial entrepreneurship: Same, different or both? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(1), 1–22. Bacq, S., & Janssen, F. (2011). The multiple faces of social entrepreneurship: A review of definitional issues based on geographical and thematic criteria. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 23(5–6), 373–403. Baines, S., Bassi, A., Csoba, J., & Sipos, F. (Eds.). (2019). Implementing innovative social investment: Strategic lessons from Europe. Bristol: Policy Press. Bergsgard, N. A., & Norberg, J. R. (2010). Sport policy and politics—The Scandinavian way. Sport in Society, 13(4), 567–582. Bjärsholm, D. (2017). Sport and social entrepreneurship: A review of a concept in progress. Journal of Sport Management, 31(2), 191–206. Bjärsholm, D. (2018). Social entrepreneurship in an international context. In K. Schenker & T. Peterson (Eds.), Sport and social entrepreneurship in Sweden (pp. 23–40). London: Palgrave Macmillan. Bjärsholm, D. (2020). Idrott som medel—inte som mål: Förutsättningar för socialt entreprenörskap inom idrotten [Sport as a means—Not as a goal: Sport and social entrepreneurship] (Doctoral dissertation). Malmö universitet, Malmö. Carlman, P., & Vikström, C. (2018). Inkludering av unga med flyktingbakgrund i värmländsk idrott [Inclusion of young immigrants in Värmland sport]. Karlstad: Karlstad University Studies. Coalter, F. (2007). A wider social role for sport: Who’s keeping the score? London, UK: Routledge. Dees, G. J. (1998). The meaning of “social entrepreneurship”. Draft report for the Kauffman Center for Entrepreneurial Leadership, Stanford University. Dees, G. J. (2007). Taking Social Entrepreneurship Seriously. Society, 44(3), 24– 31.

52

K. SCHENKER ET AL.

Defourny, J., & Nyssens, M. (2010). Conceptions of social enterprise and social entrepreneurship in Europe and the United States: Convergences and divergences. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 1(1), 32–53. Engström, L.-M. (2008). Forskning om Handslagets genomförande och resultat [Research on the handshake]. Stockholm: Riksidrottsförbundet. Fahlén, J., Eliasson, I., & Wickman, K. (2015). Resisting self-regulation: An analysis of sport policy programme making and implementation in Sweden. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 7 (3), 391–406. Fahlén, J., & Karp, S. (2010). Access denied: The new ‘sports for all’— Programme in Sweden and the reinforcement of the ‘sports performance’— Logic. Sport & EU Review., 2(1), 3–22. Fryklund, B., & Peterson, T. (1981). Populism och missnöjespartier i Norden: studier av småborgerlig klassaktivitet [Populism and parties of discontent in the Nordic countries: Studies of petty bourgeois class activity] (Doctoral dissertation). Lund University, Lund. Galindo, M.-Á., & Méndez-Picazo, M.-T. (2013). Innovation, entrepreneurship and economic growth. Management Decision, 51(3), 501–514. Gerrevall, P. (2007). Handslaget och de demokratiska värdena [The handshake and democratic values]. Stockholm: Riksidrottsförbundet. Gerrevall, P., Bjärsholm, D., & Linnér, S. (2018). Social entrepreneurship, sport and democracy development. In K. Schenker & T. Peterson (Eds.), Sport and social entrepreneurship in Sweden (pp. 75–98). London: Palgrave Macmillan. Gerrevall, P., Fahlström, P. G., Hedberg, M., & Linnér, S. (2012). Ett lyft under varierande villkor [A lift under varying conditions]. Svensk Idrottsforskning, 1, 55–59. Giulianotti, R., Itkonen, H., Nevala, A., & Salmikangas, A.-K. (2017). Sport and civil society in the Nordic region. Sport in Society, 1–15https://doi.org/10. 1080/17430437.2017.1390906. Government Offices of Sweden. (2017). Samling för daglig rörelse [Uniting for daily movement]. Stockholm: Regeringskansliet. Hedenborg, S., Jonasson, K., Peterson, T., Schenker, K., & Tolvhed, H. (2012a). Fler stannar men färre börjar [More stay, but fewer begin]. Svensk Idrottsforskning, 1, 51–54. Hedenborg, S., Jonasson, K., Peterson, T., Schenker, K., & Tolvhed, H. (2012b). Utvärdering av Idrottslyftet: Svenska Ridsportförbundet, Svenska Klätterförbundet, Svenska Orienteringsförbundet, Svenska Simförbundet och Svenska Taekwondoförbundet [Evaulation of the lift for sport]. Stockholm: Riksidrottsförbundet. Huybrechts, B., & Nicholls, A. (2012). Social entrepreneurship: Definitions, drivers and challenges. In C. K. Volkmann, K. O. Tokarski, & K. Ernst (Eds.), Social entrepreneurship and social business: An introduction and discussion with case studies (pp. 31–48). Wiesbaden: Springer-Gabler.

3

SOCIAL INNOVATIONS AND SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN SPORT

53

Light, P. C. (2008). The search for social entrepreneurship. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. Lundberg, J. (2017, December 29). Svårt både för nyanlända- och svenska ungdomar att komma in i idrotten. Intervju med Peter Carlman [Difficult for immigrants and Swedish young people to be part of the Swedish sports movement]. Idrottsforskning. Retrieved from https://www.idrottsforskning.se/ svart-bade-for-nyanlanda-och-svenska-ungdomar-att-komma-in-i-idrotten/. Misener, L., & Misener, K. (2017). Grey is the new black: Advancing understanding of new organizational forms and blurring sector boundaries in sport management. Journal of Sport Management, 31(2), 125–132. Mulgan, G. (2006). Cultivating the other invisible hand of social entrepreneurship: Comparative advantage, public policy, and future research priorities. In A. Nicholls (Ed.), Social entrepreneurship: New models of sustainable social change(pp. 74–95). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Nicholls, A. (2006). Endnote. In A. Nicholls (Ed.), Social entrepreneurship: New models of sustainable social change(pp. 407–412). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Norberg, J. R. (2004). Idrottens väg till folkhemmet. Studier i statlig idrottspolitik 1913–1970 [The sports road to the welfare state. Studies in states sport policy 1913–1970]. Malmö Studies in Sport Sciences 1. Stockholm: SISU Idrottsböcker. Norberg, J. R. (2011). A contract reconsidered? Changes in the Swedish state’s relation to the sports movement. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 3(3), 311–325. Norberg, J. R. (2015). Statens stöd till idrotten—uppföljning 2014 [The state’s support to sports—Evaluation 2014]. Stockholm: Centrum för idrottsforskning. Norberg, J. R. (2016). Idrottens spelberoende: Idrottsrörelsens offentliga stöd via spelmarknaden 1990–2009 och dess idrottspolitiska konsekvenser [The sport’s dependence on the gambling market: The state support of the sport movement via the gambling market 1990–2009 and its consequences for sport policy]. Malmö: Arx förlag. Norberg, J. R. (2018). Sweden: The societal setting. In K. Schenker & T. Peterson (Eds.), Sport and social entrepreneurship in Sweden (pp. 9–22). London: Palgrave Macmillan. Peterson, T. (2007). När fälten korsas – om Handslagsprojekt på skoltid (When the field of sport crosses the field of physical Education). Svensk Idrottsforskning, 3–4, 70–73. Peterson, T. (2008). The professionalization of sport in the Scandinavian countries. Idrottsforum.org. Retrieved from https://idrottsforum.org/articles/pet erson/peterson080220.pdf.

54

K. SCHENKER ET AL.

Peterson, T., & Schenker, K. (2015). KIOSK—Idrott och socialt entreprenörskap [KIOSK—Sport and social entrepreneurship]. Malmö: Bokbox. Peterson, T., & Schenker, K. (Eds.). (2018). Sport and social entrepreneurship in Sweden. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Phillips, W., Lee, H., Ghobadian, A., O’Regan, N., & James, P. (2015). Social innovation and social entrepreneurship: A systematic review. Group and Organization Management, 40(3), 428–461. Phills, J. A., Deiglmeier, K., & Miller, T. D. (2008). Rediscovering social innovation. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 6(4), 34–43. Ratten, V. (2017). Entrepreneurial sport policy. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 9(4), 641–648. Reynolds, S., Gabriel, M., & Heales, C. (2017). Social innovation policy in Europe: Where next? London: Nesta. Santos, F. M. (2012). A positive theory of social entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Ethics, 111(3), 335–351. Schumpeter, J. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Manamgement Review, 25(1), 217–226. Short, J. C., Moss, T. W., & Lumpkin, G. T. (2009). Research in social entrepreneurship: Past contributions and future opportunities. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 3(2), 161–194. SOU 2008:59. Föreningsfostran och tävlingsfostran: en utvärdering av statens stöd till idrotten [Democratic and competition fostering: An evaluation of the state’s support to sport]. Stockholm: Fritzes. Stenling, C., & Fahlén, J. (2016). Same same, but different? Exploring identities of Swedish voluntary sports: Possible implications of sports clubs’ selfidentification for their role as implementers of policy objectives. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 51(7), 867–883. Steyaert, C., & Katz, J. (2004). Reclaiming the space of entrepreneurship in society: Geographical, discursive and social dimensions. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 16(3), 179–196. Tjønndal, A. (2018a). Important study, groundbreaking results, problematic conclusions. Idrottsforum.org. Retrieved from https://idrottsforum.org/tjo ann_peterson-schenker180913/. Tjønndal, A. (2018b). Vilje til inklusjon – studier av innovasjon for sosial inkludering i idrett [The Intention to Include: Studies of Innovation for Social Inclusion in Sport] (Doctoral dissertation). Nord universitet, Bodø. Weber, M. (1978). Economy and Society. Berkeley: University of California Press. Wiren Åkesson, J., & Norberg, J. R. (2012). Var hamnade Idrottslyftspengarna? [Where did the Lift for sport money go?]. Svensk Idrottsforskning, 1, 4–9.

PART II

Sport and Social Innovation in Practice

CHAPTER 4

Practice Occludes Diffusion: Scaling Sport-Based Social Innovations Stefan Holmlid, David Ekholm, and Magnus Dahlstedt

Introduction In many countries, sports-based interventions are now included in social policy (e.g. Houlihan, Bloyce, & Smith, 2009), as objectives for social inclusion and integration (e.g. Haudenhuyse, 2017). Such initiatives are sometimes initiated and orchestrated as social innovations or communitybased innovations (e.g. Tjønndal, 2017; Hoeber, Doherty, Hoeber, & Wolfe, 2015; Ratten & Ferreira, 2017), where social objectives are the main driving forces for entrepreneur(s) (Mulgan, 2006) who are often deployed in cross-sectoral collaborations between community actors (e.g. Agergaard, 2012; Björgvinsson, Ehn, & Hillgren, 2010; Bason, 2018).

S. Holmlid (B) · D. Ekholm · M. Dahlstedt Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden e-mail: [email protected] D. Ekholm e-mail: [email protected] M. Dahlstedt e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 A. Tjønndal (ed.), Social Innovation in Sport, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63765-1_4

57

58

S. HOLMLID ET AL.

In contemporary Sweden, as well as in other welfare states, increased segregation has become an urgent challenge in the political discourse (Dahlstedt & Ekholm, 2019; Dikec 2017). There are a number of dimensions to such patterns of segregation that have more general bearing, ranging from geographical differentiation, stigmatization, economic and educational inequalities, polarization, to a lack of equal participation in politics (Dahlstedt & Ekholm, 2019) as well as sport and leisure activities (Blomdahl, Elofsson, Bergmark, Lengheden, & Åkesson, 2019). In particular, there has been a focus on the problem of social exclusion of urban youth (Collins & Haudenhuyse, 2015; Dahlstedt, 2019), which has, in many contexts, motivated a range of interventions, often provided in cross-sector cooperation involving civil society agencies such as sports associations (Ekholm, 2016; Reid, 2012) and community actors (Rosso & McGrath, 2017; Sabbe, Bradt, Spaaij, & Roose, 2019). In this chapter we explore how two specific sports-based interventions of Midnight Football are organized in two Swedish cities as a way of promoting social inclusion. The aim of the chapter is to examine how conditions for diffusion and infrastructuring are present in these interventions In doing so we address an interest to understand what it is that makes such interventions possible to be taken up by new cities and entrepreneurs. Our analysis directs attention towards the conditions and processes of the scaling elements of interventions, distinguishing in particular between practice, programme and the preconditions for diffusion.

Theoretical Framing Sports-based interventions have been in the limelight of social policy as a means of empowerment and community development (Coalter, 2011). Scientific discourse suggests that there is real potential in promoting social inclusion, especially when sports activities are conducted in strategic ways (cf. Ekholm, 2016). However, sports-based interventions cannot fully address or change the basic social conditions that create segregation and social exclusion (Collins & Haudenhuyse, 2015; Ekholm, 2018). As partnerships are deemed important for establishing sports-based interventions, the creation of strategies that increase or mobilize the organizational competences regarded as necessary for intervention development is a recurring topic in research. Management competences, such as organizing infrastructure for finances, planning development and

4

PRACTICE OCCLUDES DIFFUSION: SCALING SPORT-BASED …

59

governing external relations (Doherty, Misener, & Cuskelly, 2014), as well as the setting up and maintenance of supporting networks (Peachey, Cohen, Shin, & Fusaro, 2018), seem to be highly important. Capacities to form networks and social relations are additionally crucial for establishing cross-sector partnerships involving non-profit organizations, private actors and public agencies (Jones, Edwards, Bocarro, Bunds, & Smith, 2017). Notably, such competences may be associated with the involvement of capable individuals (Ferkins & Shilbury, 2012). With regard to developing interventions in inter-organizational collaborations, the strategies that are employed to promote sustainability include a focus on setting up small interventions that later can be diffused (Peachey et al., 2018). We approach such interventions as technologies of governing, aiming for social change. The analytical lens directs attention to the scaling, diffusion and infrastructuring of social interventions. We see these processes of design as a way of forming technologies of governing with the aim of promoting social inclusion and social change (cf. Ekholm, 2016). Governing here refers to the conduct of conduct (Foucault, 2010), i.e. the formation of the actions and behaviour of youth, the conductors of such work and the organizational set-up in which such formation is conducted (Dean, 2010). An innovative intervention that targets urban youth in the name of social inclusion is an example of such a technology (Dahlstedt & Ekholm, 2019). In recent decades there has been a perceived need from a variety of societal actors to develop and innovate new policy measures to combat segregation and social exclusion—to innovate social policy and “new” intervention designs. A crucial element of such policy innovation is the development of cross-sectoral forms of cooperation. One challenge when approaching a sports initiative as a social innovation is how it may multiply so that more people are engaged, or the social objectives are achieved in multiple places. However, a simple replication of an intervention design is not always viable. The process of spreading social innovations is rather referred to as “generative diffusion” (Mulgan, 2006). Moreover, the concept of scaling innovations has been elaborated on in social innovation studies. Notably, three forms of scaling have been discussed (Moore, Riddell, & Vocisano, 2015; Westley, Antadze, Riddell, Robinson, & Geobey, 2014): scaling out means that innovations are spread to more people and implemented in new places, scaling up means changing the social system causing a particular problem, while

60

S. HOLMLID ET AL.

scaling deep refers to reconfiguring social relationships and interaction patterns and promoting transformative learning. To tackle this, deliberate social innovation processes promote infrastructuring (Björgvinsson et al., 2010; Hillgren, Seravalli, & Emilson, 2011; Manzini, 2015). In short, infrastructuring refers to practices of developing conditions and infrastructures that support emergent and extensive collaboration over time to reach joint objectives. The key is agencies establishing and developing “networks of working relations – including both contests and alliances – that make technical systems possible” (Suchman, 2002, p. 92).

Sports-Based Interventions: Two Cases of Midnight Football The study reports on two cases of sports-based interventions, so called Midnight Football, in two neighbouring Swedish cities of similar size. Midnight Football, MF, is an activity for young people aged 12– 25 years, conducted in about ten cities across Sweden by a national foundation together with local organizations. Two local sports associations, one on each site, lead and run the operations. The activities are conducted in areas affected by socio-economic segregation, where a high proportion of residents have foreign backgrounds, and are explicitly aimed at counteracting exclusion and reducing crime. The activities are conducted on Saturday nights between eight PM and midnight in the form of five-a-side football. In West City, the operations are run by some of the leaders of a local association, Suburbia FC, which was formed in order to run MF. The intervention in West City is weakly formalized and faces challenges such as financing and the recruitment of managers, as well as establishing regularity and sustainability in the activities. In East City, the managing association, Sumeria FC, has been active in local football for several decades and has many youth and senior teams for both women and men in the higher divisions. The operations in East City are formalized with regular activities and paid managers and long-term financing is guaranteed by the municipality. There are ambitions to start activities at specially appointed hours for girls, for the newly arrived and to establish similar activities in the city’s suburban areas. The operations are conducted in cooperation with each municipality. In addition, a network of sponsors and volunteer charities contribute financial and organizational resources and provide access to social networks.

4

PRACTICE OCCLUDES DIFFUSION: SCALING SPORT-BASED …

61

The empirical data examined consists of interviews with the managers and coaches organizing and leading the activities and the partnering actors and agencies involved in the organizational networks. This means that representatives of the local management at the two sites were interviewed alongside representatives of the national foundation, the municipal agencies and the financial sponsors. Moreover, a number of additional actors, such as the local police, social services staff, recreation workers and other people who were informed about the intervention, were interviewed. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a total of 35 individuals. The activities in the intervention were also followed through participant observations and resulted in detailed field notes taken on five separate occasions at each site. Among the total of 35 interviews, nine respondents are featured in the chapter providing excerpts highlighted. Table 4.1 respondents are featured in the chapter. In an earlier study (Ekholm & Holmlid, 2020), we identified three mechanisms for establishing a sports-based intervention: the actual sports practice (the set-up of rules and organization of play, the organization of on-site coaches and leaders and the educational arrangement imbued in practices), the programme for establishing a sustained operation (the management and recruitment of coaches, financial administration, strategies of cooperation and communication with involved partners, strategies Table 4.1 Respondents The national foundation

The local management The municipal agencies

The financial sponsors

The foundation’s director

Martin, West City manager

The gentlemen’s club secretary

The foundation’s coordinator

Abraham, East City manager

The chairperson of the Board of Culture and Leisure in West City The chairperson of the Board of Culture and Leisure in East City The civil servant, sport issues at the culture and leisure administration in East City

The elite sport club representative

62

S. HOLMLID ET AL.

for funding from supporters and capacities to apply for funding) and the preconditions (local conditions concerning, for instance, existing sport associations and institutions, general political attitudes towards and strategies for civil society cooperation) framing the institutional aspects of an intervention. In the next section we draw on these analytic categories to empirically display how the elements of the intervention design relates to conditions for generative diffusion.

Results and Analysis In the analysis there is a diversity of voices heard, from different agencies. The network of partnering agencies involved in the two interventions consists of the local management crews, the national foundation, the municipal agencies and the financial sponsors. The national foundation provides the general intervention concept and supports the local management in each city. In the following excerpt, the director of the foundation describes their role in the operations. I’m… so to speak a social entrepreneur, and so I came up with [Midnight Football]. It was me who brought it to Sweden. I transferred the concept from England, where they had weekend games… in collaboration with the police, local youth and football clubs. I […] rearranged it to [Midnight Football] to be played at night and made sure that the gates and doors to sport centres and football fields were open after 21.30, and that’s how the concept has been diffused. [Midnight Football] is a really simple concept. (The foundation’s director)

In this excerpt, the foundation’s director describes that he was a key figure in importing the concept of MF to Sweden from the UK. Given his entrepreneurial drive, he was able to take an established concept and introduce it in another setting. He refers to this process of diffusion as “transfer”. In addition, the director describes the concept as a very simple design: it is about opening the doors and gates to arenas, setting up football activities and establishing the forms of cooperation with local sports associations that are seen to be in need of such an intervention depending on the gravity of their social problems. In an illustrative sentence, the director describes the role of the foundation as “going into the areas with

4

PRACTICE OCCLUDES DIFFUSION: SCALING SPORT-BASED …

63

the most severe problems”. Accordingly, the foundation designs the intervention, selects the object of intervention and from its external position introduces the practices locally. The local management crews in the two cities provide the local organization for the operations, perform the interventions and act as managers of the partner networks. In West City, two engaged leaders, Martin and Mustafa, affiliated with Suburbia FC, run the operations. Martin describes the simplicity of the MF concept by saying that “it is not rocket science” and stresses the strong social effect of the activities. They provide open doors, opportunities and practices with a certain set of rules and “norms to be followed”, which means that the practice has a clear structure to be implemented locally. Similarly, Abraham, the manager of East City MF, associated with Sumeria FC, explains that “the foundation is the base… they were here to introduce […] but we are here in the area, and so it is easier for us to be credible” in conducting the intervention. The municipal agencies are involved in different ways at the respective sites. They provide subsidies and grants and the general social infrastructure, e.g. facilities, or engage in more formal relations and support. The situation and collaboration at the sites are explored later and highlights the importance of municipal support for developing local interventions. Financial sponsors are market-based corporations, municipal housing companies and charity organizations, all of which provide financial support in various forms and contribute organizational capacities and extended networks. To mention one example, the manager of the sports equipment company stated that: “we are entrepreneurs […] and want to support practices that makes a difference”. Specifically, this sponsor describes how the financial support that is provided is “support to start up”. Practices The foundation provides an established design of the practices. This involves five-a-side football, with the principle that the first goal wins, the winner stays on-field and that the activity is organized and based on set rules. The more practical elements consist of the educational arrangement and the roles of coaches and leaders. Both West City and East City management crews describe themselves as implementers of the practice designed by the foundation.

64

S. HOLMLID ET AL.

Martin, the West City MF manager, above described the essence and simplicity of the activity, in terms of “it’s not rocket science”. He, moreover, emphasizes that the activities were open for all and highlighted that the rules and norms promoted the outcome and the possible social effects. Importantly, the activities and intervention are legitimized as an alternative to crime and delinquency amongst the local youth. Abraham, the manager of East City MF, described the intervention in similar terms: “we wanted to do something for the youth and we weren’t happy about the social situation”. He specifically stressed “the horrible idleness and restlessness of the local youth”. In the following excerpt he also highlights the educational ambitions of the concept provided by the foundation. The foundation educated our leaders and coaches in their concept, and the concept, really, is that you have five coaches with distinct roles. […] We have Collina, who is the referee… informs about rules and makes sure they are followed. We’ve got Wenger… the trainer, dividing into teams, handing out vests… ensures that all are involved. Tommy Söderberg… the social guy. […] Zlatan. The boss. Responsible for the activities altogether. If something occurs, it is the boss who takes action. Actually, [Sulejman] got the role of Zlatan. […] He has authority. He’s been around for a while. The kids know him… but, mainly, he’s conducted himself correctly during his time here. (Abraham)

Here, Abraham presents the educational aspect and describes how the roles of the leaders are predefined as part of the practice design in order to promote a certain pedagogical arrangement. He clearly refers to the foundation’s concept as an original idea of practice and education that is to be implemented locally. In this context, the concept of MF is diffused from the central body of the foundation—in an instance of scaling out —to the local management. The educational concept provided by the foundation, consisting of an elaborate division of roles, aids this diffusion. Rather like a modern commedia dell’arte assembly, the group of coaches represents a predefined set of roles, designed by the foundation, to portray and mediate a certain educational discourse of how people should behave and how social inclusion should be enabled. It also becomes an assumption in the fabric of governing. The gallery of roles that directly alludes to known figures in football gives it a directness that seems easy to regenerate. In the above excerpt it is clear that the local management needs to find coaches with the appropriate personal traits for the predefined roles.

4

PRACTICE OCCLUDES DIFFUSION: SCALING SPORT-BASED …

65

For instance, Sulejman—a former delinquent who has since reformed—is portrayed as a popular figure with authority and is nicknamed ‘the boss’. The predefined set up of roles in the intervention also seems to make diffusion of the practice easier. In short, the practice is constituted by the structure of the football activities and the educational arrangement, which involves rules, norms and roles, thereby making up a concurrent practice design with certain frames for diffusion. The conditions of scaling out highlight the organisational challenges of the intervention, understood as the programme. The Programme Beyond being a practice, the intervention is constituted by programme elements. In our analysis, the various elements of the programme include the recruitment and management of coaches, financial administration, strategies of cooperation and communication with cooperating partners and capacities to apply for funding. West City struggles to set up the programme on its own, whereas East City is more successful in developing the programme locally in cooperation with various partners. The recruitment of coaches is a challenge for the local management. The foundation director describes how the local managers recruit “young people aged 20 to 25 and we educate them” and that this is “a way of securing the quality” of the intervention. A key for the local managers in recruiting local coaches is financial opportunities. East City has the financial power to pay its coaches, whereas resources for West City is scarce. The foundation coordinator explained that finances depended on “the kind of networks local management build with businesses and, primarily, with the municipality”. Regarding economic compensation, Abraham pinpointed how paying the coaches had made “coaches prioritize the practices” and “deliver a solid result”, as well as how in turn, “longterm sustainability of the practices” had been enabled. In contrast, Martin described how (in West City) there had been a real challenge to recruit coaches and maintain engagement. He said that “they need to be serious” and that some of the recruited coaches had ended their commitment abruptly and engaged in delinquent activities themselves. The West City management does not have sufficient resources to pay coaches for their

66

S. HOLMLID ET AL.

time. Rather, the coaches’ participation is based on voluntary commitment, supposedly compensating for a lack of professionality or economic compensation. Financial resources and administrative routines are instrumental for developing and implementing the interventions, beyond coach recruitment. In different ways, the local managers deal with the challenges of accessing funds to sustain operations (Ekholm, 2019; Ekholm & Dahlstedt, 2018; Ekholm & Holmlid, 2020). Even when funding is obtained, there are notable differences between the sites in terms of how the financial affairs are administered. Financial administration provides an accessible illustration of the administrative and organizational routines and capacities. In the following excerpts, three administrative infrastructures are accounted for. In the first excerpt, the secretary of the Gentlemen’s Club describes the situation in West City. Instead of providing them with money, we were going to pay their bills. So we said that we’d pay the rent for the sports centre… to make sure that the money was used for something real. [They] take a picture of the invoice and we pay it. They haven’t done that well. I’ve been in touch with them about sending the bills and so… But that’s not really their main focus. (The gentlemen’s club secretary)

The charitable support comes in the form of covering the cost of the sports arena. As illustrated, the local managers are unable to pay the bills. Instead, they are instructed to photograph the invoices and message them to the benefactor. In the following excerpt, the East City MF manager gives an account of alternative infrastructures. We had a clear division of roles. [The elite sports club] manages the financing part and nothing more. We do everything else. […] When we have expenses for the [Midnight Football], we send a copy together with an invoice from us, and the [elite sports club] pays that amount to us. […] We now run the project on our own. This means that we handle the financial administration ourselves, but we do it all as before. The only thing that is added is that instead of sending an invoice to the [elite sports club], we find partners and send a large invoice to them, so that we buffer the amount within our organization. (Abraham)

Three different infrastructures of financial administration are outlined. The first is the informal routine of West City MF. It should be noted that

4

PRACTICE OCCLUDES DIFFUSION: SCALING SPORT-BASED …

67

the described routine may not be the only way of dealing with financial administration. The example illustrates the sometimes spontaneous ways of management—where the external partner is utilized for administration. However, such an infrastructure may be difficult to institutionalize or scale. Second, using the partnering actors (the elite sports club) and their pre-established infrastructures to deal with financial administration, was a successful routine during that partnership. The partner’s infrastructure was integrated into the general arrangement and governing of the programme. Such forms of action can be diffused from one actor to another, for instance through an articulated programme design, or by means of cooperation and communication between different intervention sites. In this sense, the routines are examples of scaling deep, embracing influences and learning from other actors and transforming the MF infrastructure. The routines may not be directly replicated, but with joint learning processes across sites, generative diffusion can occur. Third, as cooperation was not sustained in East City between the two associations, MF management was able to use Sumeria FC as the infrastructure for its financial administration. Such routines are highly dependent on the organizational capacities of the hosting association, which can take a long time to develop. Sumeria FC has over the years developed a range of activities and a broad scope of operations, all of which necessitate administrative capacities. Infrastructure like this may be difficult to establish, but there is potential for diffusion by scaling out when the necessary prerequisites are in place. Illustratively, Suburbia FC in West City has not been able to develop such capacities. Neither have the infrastructures developed in East City helped the West City management, largely due to a lack of diffusion between the sites. By looking closer at the organizational capacities accessed in the partnership networks, the representative of the elite sports club highlighted the established design provided by the foundation and how the various partners supplemented each other. The representative stressed that “the foundation had a well-tried concept, a structure really… we [had] community and business contacts and a large social network… and [Sumeria FC] had strong local connections in the area”. Together, these agencies saw themselves as providing the competences that were needed to develop the intervention locally. This displays how the agencies perceived the intervention concept and how the design developed externally but was implemented locally. The local agencies of East City had

68

S. HOLMLID ET AL.

the infrastructure and capabilities to realize the concept in local practice. Here, the organizational capacities were seen as possible to mobilize. Again, and in contrast, West City lacked the necessary organizational capacities and no organizational structure or support was provided by the foundation. According to Martin, the local management “needs organizational steering”, someone “to help us to think in the right way”. He described the association as “sound… but not as a solid organization to manage”, in terms of the implementation or development of a programme infrastructure. Even if there had been an elaborated programme design, the local management did not seem to perceive their organization as one that was capable of implementing administrative and networking routines properly. In conclusion, a programme is needed to enable the diffusion and scaling out of MF practices. If a clear programme design is not provided and diffused directly from foundation to local management, between local managements, or from other actors and agencies in the networks, leader recruitment strategies, administrative routines and network competences will need to be generated locally. The programme needs to be designed to allow for the practice to function, to allow for infrastructuring. However, even when a predefined programme design is established as a concept, problems may still arise when it is implemented locally. The local preconditions, such as the policy ambitions of municipal policymakers and the number of existing local associations in the area, will also produce differences in programme designs. Accordingly, diffusion will not then be a matter of scaling out, but rather of scaling deep, i.e. developing or redefining the organization to facilitate the scaling out of the intervention practices. Preconditions Local development of the interventions tends to depend on certain preconditions beyond the practice and the programme. This includes the local conditions and practices of the existing sport associations and general political strategies for civil society cooperation. With regard to the already existing local associations and structures of civil society, the foundation director described the role of the foundation as identifying the needs of local communities and the organizations with the capacity to implement the interventions locally. West City is an interesting example in this respect. According to the foundation director, as

4

PRACTICE OCCLUDES DIFFUSION: SCALING SPORT-BASED …

69

there were no eligible or suitable associations operating in the area, a new association was formed with local enthusiasts. Moreover, according to the chairperson of the Board of Culture and Leisure in West City municipality, the situation for associations in the area “is characterized by financial embezzlement, deserted associations and fractions [and] so many failures”. Accordingly, “that makes it more demanding for them than for others”. In contrast, Sumeria FC in East City had already at the start of the intervention established collaborations with other associations and developed contacts with municipal agencies. In terms of political strategies and forms for municipal and civil society support and collaboration, the chairperson of the West City municipal Board of Culture and Leisure highlighted the importance of how the municipal agencies approached and utilized civil society cooperation. … it’s also very much connected with who is in political control. […] It is our big dividing line against the opposition. [The centre-right opposition] see the sport associations as social heroes, solving all social problems… And we really don’t see it that way. […] It has never worked that way so far… that one single actor has solved all the problems in one area. […] In a way, we do not see it as anything else [than sport]. […] We could also see it as a… a kind of social work. But if we did that, then we would need to form a partnership with an association. And then, we’d need to sit down and formally define the social problem we’d need to target. And if we didn’t agree on the social problem, then we’d have nothing to solve. […] We look a bit differently at the problems that need to be solved. […] With a partnership, we’d have to agree on what we were going to solve. (Chairperson of the West City Board of Culture and Leisure)

In this excerpt, the chairperson expresses reservations about the potential of civil society efforts and the political opposition’s naïvety and introduces the two forms of collaboration that are possible between the municipality and local MF management. Somewhat sarcastically, reference is made to community actors allegedly being seen by the liberal-right opposition as “social heroes, solving all the problems”, thus confirming that policymakers and administrators in West City require high standards of professionalism in social interventions. The importance of having insight into the supported operations to provide for more formal and long-term support is also articulated. Therefore, the definition of the problems that are targeted and the objectives to be achieved need to be calibrated in order to grant extended financial support. As the activities

70

S. HOLMLID ET AL.

cannot be conceived of as social work based on partnership, they are thus only regarded as voluntary sporting activities. Consequently, even if a programme was eligible for funding and the management was capable of implementing the programme, the preconditions may not necessarily support the required processes—in terms of a lack of organizational structures and, perhaps, a more reserved municipal faith and support. In the previous excerpt, the chairperson of the West City Board of Culture and Leisure accounted for two alternatives and explained why only the less formalized association grant could be awarded. Looking towards East City, the municipal representatives indicated that four alternatives, based on predefined strategies, were possible when it came to collaboration with MF. Association grants can be given to voluntary organizations providing sports activities for youth. Development contributions can be granted when associations develop innovative activities for youth. Assignment funds can be granted when civil society actors conduct activities that explicitly correspond with municipal social policy objectives. Partnerships can be formed when activities provided by civil society actors are not seen as primarily sports activities, but rather as social interventions. In East City, after some renegotiation, assignment funds were granted, thus guaranteeing long-term financial support. The chairperson of the Board of Culture and Leisure noted that “the association runs an activity […] guided by the objectives in our policy assignments” and “they conduct an activity for the municipality, really”. This kind of organization is subject to a variety of reflections concerning how much of detailed municipal governing of civil society is preferred. The chairperson said that “there are limits to how detailed we can govern the assignments” and that “civil society is free and autonomous” so “it might well be that they don’t fulfil the original objectives”. Along similar lines, the chief civil servant also raised some concerns when describing how they sought to redevelop their civil society collaboration formats. To what extent should we give an assignment based on our goals, or to what extent is ir up to the associations to apply for grants? So… how do we… where do we find the balance in that? Which part should be which part? And then we are… or if… should everything be in the hands of the associations and it will be as it will be with our goals? Or how hard should we press on to achieve goal fulfilment? (Civil servant, sport issues at the culture and leisure administration level)

4

PRACTICE OCCLUDES DIFFUSION: SCALING SPORT-BASED …

71

Interestingly, the municipal representatives went beyond the predefined administrative structure regulating the types of cooperation that were possible. In East City, the municipal representatives constantly reflected on how the assignment fund should be organized. Accordingly, potential recalibrations of the preconditions helped to set the frames for the programme and the preconditions surrounding the infrastructure of the programme in East City (although not so much in West City). In this sense, developing the two different programmes can be supported by infrastructuring, building on these different frames, or participating in changing those frames. In a way, the reflections of the East City municipal representatives displayed the potential for scaling deep in terms of potentially reassessing the conditions for civil society cooperation, creating generative conditions for diffusion. Summarizing, in order to scale out practices and work with the infrastructuring of programmes locally, a number of preconditions are vital and need to be acknowledged. The prevailing structures of existing associations and the attitudes and routines of the municipal policymaking and administrative institutions are two illustrative preconditions that determine how a programme can be developed and how an intervention can be diffused. A number of agencies work actively, although not perhaps strategically, with infrastructuring: the foundation develops practices (and supports a programme design), the local management develops (in the best case) programmes, and municipalities have the opportunity to infrastructure preconditions. The potential reconfiguration of the kinds of collaborations that are available can be viewed as an example of scaling deep: in West City, actively proposing and negotiating the conditions for seeing the activities as a “social intervention” or as a “sport practice” and in East City, renegotiating the objectives of the activities so that they align with municipal social policy objectives. The actors implementing the practices and developing the programmes (i.e. the local management crews, associations, partners and the foundation) can navigate in relation to the preconditions or actively engage in putting political pressure on municipal and other agencies to transform (cf. Ekholm & Holmlid, 2020) and can contribute to scaling deep as well as potentially scaling up. In any case, it is important to understand and accept the preconditions in order to be able to infrastructure the intervention at the programme level (and thus develop sustained practices).

72

S. HOLMLID ET AL.

Discussion and Conclusions On the basis of our examination of the two sports-based interventions, we will now discuss the conditions and processes for the distinct levels of intervention to be diffused and scaled, identify how the levels can be governed and how diffusion and scaling needs design work and infrastructuring at several levels. On Governing Distinguishing between the three levels, practice, programme and preconditions, means that we can analyze the targets of the governing processes of infrastructuring. The foundation’s infrastructuring, as expressed through the elaborate design of the practice, targets entrepreneurs who are willing to take on social initiatives and supporters and participants who are interested in football. This makes the practice level possible to govern at the local intervention sites, and by a directly accessible design, primarily aimed at the practice level, thus creating expectations of easy implementation at intervention sites. The foundation provides a less developed programme design. Specific elements of the programme can be governed, but the success of it depends on the infrastructuring at the local site of intervention. Programme level aspects, such as the recruitment of coaches, financial administration, strategies for funding and communications with cooperating partners, are instrumental for the success of that practice, but are dependent on preconditions. The preconditions cannot be governed by the foundation or the local management. However, the structure of local associations and political strategies can reasonably be governed and can also be designed by the municipal agencies (at least in a long-term perspective). On Diffusion In our analysis we expand on the concepts of scaling as generative diffusion and highlight that these apply to different levels of interventions and may be interdependent through governing arrangements. Scaling out— having more people participate in the interventions—will require scaling deep in order to drive processes of transformative learning and change

4

PRACTICE OCCLUDES DIFFUSION: SCALING SPORT-BASED …

73

relationships. The former mainly relates to the practice level, while the latter mainly relates to the programme- and precondition levels. The design of the practice, supported by examples of successful local implementation, can be applied almost anywhere. Examples of successful diffusion can also help to spread the practice further. However, the analysis highlights that a simple replication of the practice is not enough, the programme level also needs attention. The programme level includes a complex and dynamic system of institutions, interactions and actions. These systems are not the same across local sites. Thus, a detailed design at the programme level is likely to restrict the possibilities of diffusion only to sites where similar conditions apply. Rather, a meaningful programme that will support diffusion, needs to be defined as a process of design that supports generative diffusion so that local actors can arrange the programme elements in ways that fit the local pre-conditions. In the diffusion process, developing an understanding of local preconditions and making use of inspirational examples aids the creation of the programme. Changing the practice may be needed depending on the preconditions or programme restrictions, as long as the purpose and the effects are in focus. In other words, instead of focusing on how to implement a given practice design, a focus on the purpose of the practice will help to regenerate a practice as diffusion. On Infrastructuring The analysis of the interventions highlights certain aspects of infrastructuring that are specifically relevant for interventions aiming to achieve social objectives in cross-sectoral collaborations. At the programme level, infrastructuring appears in several forms. Some aspects, such as ways of working with sponsors, may build on institutionalized ways of working and be shared between local sites with similar organizational capabilities. However, other aspects need deliberate infrastructuring, where the focus is on engaging the relevant actors to participate in creating a programme that makes the practice, or its purpose, possible. At one extreme, this means developing and tuning the programme to local preconditions. At the other extreme, it means identifying how the local preconditions might restrict the interventions, whether the social objectives will be

74

S. HOLMLID ET AL.

achieved and possibly even identifying conditions for scaling up. Infrastructuring can help to manage the tensions between the programme and the preconditions. It can also help government bodies to cooperate with civil society actors to identify development areas, which may be necessary in order to change the preconditions and create new frames of possibilities for the social objectives. On Directing Change How locally based intervention innovations for combating advanced social segregation are designed raises a number of questions that need to be considered. For example, there are limits to how local or specific interventions can respond to or even solve complex structural problems in society. There is a risk of demarcating social problems and locating them to certain areas and individuals and thereby contributing further to exclusion. Accordingly, the design of the intervention is important when it comes to developing social policy and promoting social inclusion; especially when providing sports activities for youth who lack such opportunities. However, a broad political reform that targets structural segregation also needs to be on the agenda if social inclusion is to be achieved. In several aspects, our analysis reaffirms the recurring themes in the literature on sport management and highlights organizational capacities and concerns about the diffusion of small-scale operations to larger-scale and more complex intervention designs (cf. Jones et al., 2017; Peachey et al., 2018). Nevertheless, our detailed empirical observations pinpoint how the intervention elements of practice, programme and preconditions and the interactions between the various agencies involved condition the potential scaling and diffusion of the intervention. In that particular respect, we have provided empirical accounts of how innovative social intervention designs can be, and are perceived, to be managed, scaled, diffused and infrastructured at two local sites of operation. These interventions are specifically situated in the context of a Swedish welfare model under reconstruction, involving on the one hand cross-sectoral cooperation and innovative intervention designs on the other—and, specifically, how these forms of intervention are played out in a social and geographical landscape of segregation and social exclusion. The analysis

4

PRACTICE OCCLUDES DIFFUSION: SCALING SPORT-BASED …

75

that is presented directs attention to how sports-based interventions are designed and infrastructured in order to deal with societal challenges such as segregation and social exclusion and instead facilitate social change and social inclusion.

References Agergaard, S. (2012). Governing integration through sports. A case study of civil society involvement in welfare policy. Nordic Journal of Migration Research, 2(1), 26–34. Bason, C. (2018). Leading public sector innovation: Co-creating for a better society. Bristol: Policy Press. Björgvinsson, E., Ehn, P., & Hillgren, P. A. (2010). Participatory design and democratizing innovation. Proceedings of the 11th participatory Design Conference (pp. 41–50). ACM. Blomdahl, U., Elofsson, S., Bergmark, K., Lengheden, L., & Åkesson, M. (2019). Ökar ojämlikheten i föreningsidrotten? – en studie om socioekonomisk bakgrund och barns och ungdomars deltagande i idrottsförening. Malmö: Ung Livsstil. Coalter, F. (2011). The politics of sport-for-development: Limited focus programmes and broad gague problems. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 45(3), 295–314. Collins, M., & Haudenhuyse, R. P. (2015). Social exclusion and austerity policies in England: The role of sports in a new area of social polarisation and inequality? Social Inclusion, 3(3), 5–18. Dahlstedt, M. (2019). Problematizing the urban periphery. In S. Keskinen, U. D. Skaptadottír, & M. Toivanen (Eds.), Undoing homogeneity (pp. 88–102). London: Routledge. Dahlstedt, M., & Ekholm, D. (2019). Social exclusion and multi-ethnic suburbs in Sweden. In B. Hanlon & T. J. Vicino (Eds.), The Routledge companion to the suburbs (pp. 163–172). New York: Routledge. Dean, M. (2010). Governmentality. London: Sage. Dikec, M. (2017). Urban rage. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Doherty, A., Misener, K., & Cuskelly, G. (2014). Toward a multidimensional framework of capacity in community sport clubs. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 43(2), 124–142. Ekholm, D. (2016). Sport as a means of responding to social problems. Linköping University. Ekholm, D. (2018). Governing by means of sport for social change and social inclusion: Demarcating the domains of problematization and intervention. Sport in Society, 21(11), 1777–1794.

76

S. HOLMLID ET AL.

Ekholm, D. (2019). Kommunal och civilsamhällelig samverkan för idrott som ett verktyg för integration och sociala ändamål. Centrum för kommunstrategiska studier, rapport. Linköping University. Ekholm, D., & Dahlstedt, M. (2018). Rationalities of good-will: On the promotion of philanthropy through sports-based interventions in Sweden. Managing Sport and Leisure, 23(4–6), 336–349. Ekholm, D., & Holmlid, S. (2020). Formalizing sports-based interventions in cross-sectoral cooperation: Governing and infrastructuring practice, program, and preconditions. Journal of Sport for Development, 8(14), 1–20. Ferkins, L., & Shilbury, D. (2012). Good boards are strategic: What does that mean for sport governance? Human Kinetics Journal, 26(1), 67–80. Foucault, M. (2010). The birth of biopolitics. New York: Picador. Haudenhuyse, R. (2017). Introduction to the issue “Sport for social inclusion: questioning policy, practice and research”. Social Inclusion, 5(2), 85–90. Hillgren, P.-A., Seravalli, A., & Emilson, A. (2011). Prototyping and infrastructuring in design for social innovation. CoDesign, 7 (3–4), 169–183. Hoeber, L., Doherty, A., Hoeber, O., & Wolfe, R. (2015). The nature of innovation in community sport organizations. European Sport Management Quarterly, 15, 518–534. Houlihan, B., Bloyce, D., & Smith, A. (2009). Editorial: Developing a research agenda in sport policy. International Journal of Sport Policy, 1(1), 1–12. Jones, G. J., Edwards, M. B., Bocarro, J. N., Bunds, K. S., & Smith, J. W. (2017). A structural perspective of cross-sector partnerships involving youth sport nonprofit organizations. European Sport Management Quarterly, 18(2), 133–155. Manzini, E. (2015). Design, when everybody designs: An introduction to design for social innovation. Cambridge: MIT press. Moore, M. L., Riddell, D., & Vocisano, D. (2015). Scaling out, scaling up, scaling deep: Strategies of non-profits in advancing systemic social innovation. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 58, 67–84. Mulgan, G. (2006). The process of social innovation. Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, 1(2), 145–162. Peachey, J. W., Cohen, A., Shin, N., & Fusaro, B. (2018). Challenges and strategies of building and sustaining inter-organizational partnerships in sport for development and peace. Sport Management Review, 21(2), 160–175. Ratten, V., & Ferreira, J. (2017). Entrepreneurship, innovation and sport policy: Implications for future research. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 9(4), 575–577. Reid, F. (2012). Increasing sports participation in Scotland: Are voluntary sports clubs the answer? International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 4(2), 221–241.

4

PRACTICE OCCLUDES DIFFUSION: SCALING SPORT-BASED …

77

Rosso, E. G. F., & McGrath, R. (2017). Community engagement and sport? Building capacity to increase opportunities for community-based sport and physical activity. Annals of Leisure Research, 20(3), 349–367. Sabbe, S., Bradt, L., Spaaij, R., & Roose, R. (2019). We’d like to eat bread too, not grass: Exploring the structural approaches of community sport practitioners in Flanders. European Journal of Social Work, 1–13. Suchman, L. (2002). Located accountabilities in technology production. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 14(2), 91–105. Tjønndal, A. (2017). Sport innovation: Developing a typology. European Journal for Sport and Society, 14(4), 291–310. Westley, F., Antadze, N., Riddell, D. J., Robinson, K., & Geobey, S. (2014). Five configurations for scaling up social innovation: Case examples of nonprofit organizations from Canada. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 50(3), 234–260.

CHAPTER 5

‘We App to Move’—A Co-Created Digital Platform to Support Self-Organized Sporting Activities for Socially Vulnerable Youth in Bruges Charlotte Van Tuyckom

Introduction: Sport and Socially Vulnerable Groups in Flanders, Belgium Flanders (the Dutch-speaking region of Belgium) has been a pioneer in the development of a sport-for-all policy (Theeboom, Haudenhuyse, & De Knop, 2010). In the early 1970s, large-scale promotional campaigns were launched to stimulate the participation of specific target groups in sport (e.g. women, elderly people and people with disabilities). Two decades later, the emphasis shifted towards young people, who showed worsening levels of physical fitness and had high dropout rates from organized sports (Theeboom, Haudenhuyse, & De Knop, 2010). Also during that period, several specific community sports initiatives were set up in

C. Van Tuyckom (B) Howest School of Applied Sciences, Brugge, Belgium e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 A. Tjønndal (ed.), Social Innovation in Sport, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63765-1_5

79

80

C. VAN TUYCKOM

Flanders by players outside the traditional sports system (often initiated within the youth welfare sector, but also including sectors of education, integration, social affairs, prevention etc.) to stimulate participation amongst the underprivileged or socially deprived youth (Theeboom & De Knop, 1992; for a historical overview in Flanders, see Theeboom & De Maesschalck, 2006). As the majority of these initiatives were situated outside the ‘regular’ sports provision (i.e. local sports services and sports clubs), the limited availability of adequate sports facilities was one of the major problems in reaching out to these young people. This led to the emergence of alternative organizational formats in Flanders, with an emphasis on high accessibility through the organization of sporting activities in public squares, streets and parks in socially deprived areas, which became known as ‘Buurtsport’ or ‘neighbourhood sports’. This is coupled with the fact that self-organized sporting activities, characterized by low(er) thresholds for users and indicating a looser and more flexible way of setting up activities as opposed to the fixed structure of traditional sports clubs, have increasingly made their entry into local sports provision. In the literature, they are referred to as “light sports communities” (Delnoij, 2004; Duyvendak & Hurenkamp, 2004). ‘Buurtsport’ or ‘neighbourhood sports’ are especially aimed at socially vulnerable youth and can be seen as well-developed alternatives of these ‘light communities’ in Flanders. As these young people often grow up in families with no experience of pre-organized leisure time activities, it is difficult for them to engage in a classical, structured way, as is needed for participation in traditional sports clubs. The definition of ‘Buurtsport’, or ‘neighbourhood sports’, is similar to that of community sports development described by Hylton and Totten (2008, p. 113): “a flexible, adaptable, informal, interactive, people-centered approach, aimed at lowering the initial thresholds to participation in order to address the deficiencies of mainstream provision”. In this chapter, I highlight how socially vulnerably youth in Bruges were involved in every step of the process of creating a digital platform to support self-organized sporting activities (‘We app to move’). Although the concept of the Flemish ‘Buurtsport’ can be compared with similar formats elsewhere in Europe (Theeboom, Haudenhuyse, & De Knop, 2010; Theeboom, Truyens, & Haudenhuyse, 2008), the choice of neighbourhood sporting activities, as well as the organizational level and type of guidance approach, varies according to the target group(s) and the specific neighbourhood characteristics (Theeboom, Haudenhuyse, & De Knop, 2010). Therefore, I first elaborate on the organisation of neighbourhood

5

‘WE APP TO MOVE’—A CO-CREATED DIGITAL …

81

sports in the city of Bruges, and discuss the particular challenges they face. Next, I set out the theoretical perspective in which the case of ‘We app to move’ is placed. I discuss a number of relevant aspects of social innovation in the public sector and I briefly address the role that is attached to citizens as initiators or co-creators of public services in the context of self-organization. Finally, I outline the usefulness of the design thinking methodology for the case study in particular and social (sport) innovation practices in general. By way of clarification, the research for the case study ‘We app to move’ was conducted by the author and colleagues and was funded by the Department of Economy, Science and Innovation of the Flemish Government. Neighbourhood Sports in Bruges (‘Buurtsport Brugge’) Bruges, covering 138 km2 and with a population of 118,284 citizens (= 854.65 citizens/km2 ), is the capital city of the Flemish province of West Flanders. The coordination and implementation of neighbourhood sports in Bruges (‘Buurtsport Brugge’) has for the most part been initiated outside the public and private sports sector by the municipal youth prevention service. ‘Buurtsport Brugge’ has 1 coordinator and 3 sports animators. Based on the Flemish “poverty index” (“Kansarmoede index”), three neighbourhoods (Zeebrugge, Sint-Pieters and Sint-Jozef, see Fig. 5.1) are defined as deprived areas. These neighbourhoods are specifically characterized by a lack of sports clubs and sports facilities. ‘Buurtsport’ is perceived as successful in the city of Bruges (Naert, Roose, & Vanderplasschen, 2018) and addresses more than 400 socially vulnerable young people between the ages of 16–22. Nevertheless, a major deficiency (apart from the little cooperation with sports clubs) that has been pinpointed by the coordinator is the high dependency on his own actions and enthusiasm for organizing sporting activities. Although the ‘Buurtsport Brugge’ Facebook page (where the sporting activities are announced) has worked quite well, sending endless text messages to the young people to remind them about the sporting activities is very time-consuming and, evidently, not very motivating for the coordinator if they do not turn up. This led to the launching of the project ‘We app to move’, the aim of which is to develop a facilitating tool/application/platform co-created with and tailored to the needs and environments of socially vulnerable youth from the three deprived neighbourhoods in Bruges. This digital tool is intended to help the young

82

C. VAN TUYCKOM

Fig. 5.1 The three socially deprived neighbourhoods in Bruges (Zeebrugge, Sint-Pieters and Sint-Jozef), based on the Flemish “poverty index”

people to make contact with each other (and with the coordinator and the animators) to organize sporting activities themselves, discover existing initiatives in the neighbourhood and support each other to really engage in sporting activities. In the following, I set out the theoretical perspective on social innovation in which the case of ‘We app to move’ is placed.

5

‘WE APP TO MOVE’—A CO-CREATED DIGITAL …

83

The Concept of Social Innovation The core of the concept of social innovation is the active involvement of citizens in public service delivery, often referred to as ‘co-creation’ (a concept that is also central in the design thinking methodology, as will be elaborated on later in the chapter). However, as Pollit and Hupe (2011, p. 642) stress, social innovation and co-creation have become ‘magic concepts’ that have recently been embraced by academics and policymakers in public (sports) sectors across the globe. According to Bekkers et al. (2015), the magic of the concept is based on the fact that it tries to meet two specific goals. The first goal of social innovation is to overcome the current and vital challenges of modern western societies. For instance, with regard to sport, the increased life expectancy of citizens leads to an increased demand for specific sport and movement related services for the elderly. Another example is that the deprivation of specific areas in cities (including Bruges) leads to social, economic and cultural inequalities that still influence access to sports-related activities. In this regard, social innovation can be seen as a (fairy) tale and a common language that policymakers and citizens use to talk about how to tackle specific social and political challenges (Bekkers et al., 2015) The second goal of social innovation is related to the (diminishing) role of the government. Public spending on sport in Flanders has decreased in real terms (De Knop & van der Poel, 2006). Due to economic recessions and the effects of a more (neo-)liberal monetary system, the power of the state to influence the sports market has diminished. As a result, the state is pulling back in the sectors in which it previously had a monopoly position (Theeboom, Haudenhuyse, & De Knop, 2010). The budgetary crisis in the public sector in many European countries has sparked a discussion about the role of (local) government organizations in the provision of different kinds of services and (semi-)public goods, also in the sports sector (Hoekman, Breedveld, & Kraaykamp, 2017). In this regard, social innovation functions as a catalyst to discuss new governance and public service arrangements (Bekkers et al., 2015). Although social innovation is an inspiring concept, it is weakly conceptualized. According to Voorberg, Bekkers and Tummers (2015), this is mainly due to the dominance of grey, policy-oriented literature (Bates, 2012; Bjögvinsson, Ehn, & Hillgren, 2012; Cels, De Jong, & Nauta, 2012; Howalt & Schwarz, 2010; Kamoji, Orton, & Williamson, 2009;

84

C. VAN TUYCKOM

Mulgan, 2009; Murray, Caulier-Grice, & Mulgan, 2010; among others). As a consequence, there are probably as many definitions of social innovation as there are scholars researching the subject. As other chapters in this book include more theoretical elaborations of the definition(s) of social innovation (see chapters 1–4), in this chapter 1 only touch on some of the elements that recur in the many and varied definitions of social innovation (Bekkers et al., 2015; Voorberg, Bekkers, & Tummers, 2015). A first element is that social innovation aims to produce long-lasting outcomes that are relevant for parts of society, given the needs and challenges of the specific target groups. It is thereby important to look beyond technology and see how social innovations create and contribute to public values (such as behaviour and attitudes) that are considered to be important (Howalt & Schwartz, 2010; Moore, 1995). Although ‘We app to move’ is in essence a technical project (given that the aim is to develop a facilitating tool/application/platform), the focus lies entirely on cocreation with and tailoring to the needs and environments of socially vulnerable youth from the three deprived neighbourhoods. Of key importance is the active involvement of these young people into both the product (platform) and service (self-organization of sporting activities) delivery. A second element is that social innovation fundamentally changes the social relationships and ‘playing rules’ between the involved stakeholders (Howalt & Schwartz, 2010; Osborne & Brown, 2011). Also in ‘We app to move’, social innovation acts as a ‘game changer’, in that the organization of the sporting activities will no longer be solely dependent on the enthusiasm of the coordinator. The digital tool should help the young people to make contact with each other (and with the coordinator and the sport animators), organize sporting activities themselves, discover existing initiatives in the neighbourhood and support each other to really engage in the sporting activities. A third element is that in order to produce outcomes that really matter, end users and other relevant stakeholders need to be involved in the design, implementation and/or adoption of these need-driven innovations (Bason, 2010; Chesbrough, 2003, 2006; Sorensen & Torfing, 2011; Von Hippel, 2007). Relevant stakeholders should bring their knowledge, information, skills, experiences and resources to bear so that the produced outcomes of innovation processes become more relevant. Special attention should consequently be paid to the specific needs and

5

‘WE APP TO MOVE’—A CO-CREATED DIGITAL …

85

challenges of the end users. In this case study, the socially deprived youth were involved in every single step of the process, as were people from different organizations related to youth and welfare work in Bruges (and work with socially deprived youth in non-sporting contexts), teachers and students from the bachelor degree programmes Digital Design and Development (Devine) and Sports and Movement Sciences. Based on the above elements, Voorberg, Bekkers and Tummers (2015, p. 1333) define social innovation as “the creation of long-lasting outcomes that aim to address societal needs by changing fundamentally the relationships, positions and rules between the involved stakeholders, through a process of participation and collaboration”. Social innovation can be perceived as a game changer because new rules of the game, new relationships and new positions are created. The traditional role of the government (in this case study, the role of the coordinator of ‘Buurtsport Brugge’) as a producer of relevant services (here, the sporting activities) has been abandoned for, or at least challenged by, alternative arrangements (the socially deprived youth who also organize sporting activities themselves). Co-creation with the end users (the socially deprived youth) in the design and development of new goods and services gains importance (Von Hippel, 2007) and in many social (sport) innovation practices self -organizations play an increasingly important role. Therefore, in the next Sect. 1 look at this concept of self-organization in more detail.

The Role of Self-Organization in Social Innovation In the slipstream of social innovation, the idea of self-organization and self-organizing communities are put forward as alternatives for traditional government-based public services (Edelenbos & Van Meerkerk, 2011; Nederhand, Bekkers, & Voorberg, 2016). Typical for these selforganizing activities is that citizens (here, socially deprived youth) are perceived as initiators or co-creators of new public services (Voorberg, Bekkers, & Tummers, 2015). New ways of thinking are explored in these “collaborative innovation networks” (Bekkers et al., 2015), thus providing alternatives for the traditional ways in which public services, projects and programmes are currently produced. As previously mentioned with regard to ‘light sport communities’, citizens now want to engage in informal and loosely structured organizations with less bureaucracy (Lorentzen & Hustinx, 2007; Stolle & Hooghe, 2005) rather

86

C. VAN TUYCKOM

than existing political and governmental structures and procedures that they consider to be no longer legitimate or effective. This differs from traditional forms of citizen engagement. Illustrative in this regard is the increasing popularity of start-ups like CitizenLab, providing online citizen participation platforms for local authorities. This also implies a change in the traditional roles of governmental actors, in that another way of government steering is required. Civil servants also need to develop new skills in order to facilitate and support the emergence of self-organizing communities (Bekkers et al., 2015). Therefore, in ‘We app to move’ it was important to engage and co-create with the socially deprived youth as well as with the coordinator of ‘Buurtsport Brugge’ whose role would change once the new platform was in use. Evidently, self-organizing communities are not isolated and are shaped in interaction with existing political and governmental institutions. Governance and self-governance are not exclusive or contrasting developments, but influence each other in a specific local context. As Goldstein (1999) argues, the (local) government is just one of the many actors in a self-organizing network. Moreover, public initiatives can end up in selforganization, such as the participants of a 7 week start-to-run course organized by the local sport authorities who, at the end of the course, started a local ‘running crew’ to continue their weekly running routine. On the other hand, self-organization can be ‘mainstreamed’ in formal policy, for instance a neighbourhood ‘running crew’ that is absorbed by a local athletics club. Although little is known about how community self-organizations effectively develop in interaction with these existing institutions (Stolle & Hooghe, 2005), a stimulating institutional context is considered to be an important prerequisite for the blooming of community self-organization (Hurenkamp, Tonkens, & Duyvendak, 2006; Van Meerkerk, Boonstra, & Edelenbos, 2013). Although it is less known what ‘stimulating’ exactly entails, we learn from ‘We app to move’ that the open attitude of the coordinator of ‘Buurtsport Brugge’ (as the representative for ‘the government’ in the case study) towards the socially deprived youth and consideration of their culture, needs and challenges during the whole project was a key condition for succeeding in self-organization. As the situation of ‘Buurtsport Brugge’ shows, social challenges require solutions that are properly grounded in the end users’ (here, the socially deprived youth) needs. This is exactly where many approaches and research methods fail, but it is also exactly where the methodology of user-centred design thinking excels.

5

‘WE APP TO MOVE’—A CO-CREATED DIGITAL …

87

In the following section, I clarify the added value of using design thinking as a research tool to the case of ‘We app to move’ in particular and social (sport) innovation practices and self-organization in general.

Design Thinking as a Research Tool for Social Innovation Practices Design has always been a catalyst for innovation processes, both in the development of products and services. Over the years, and with numerous publications about design thinking (Brown, 2009; Cross, 2011; Liedtka & Ogilvie, 2011; Lockwood, 2010; Martin, 2009; among others), the term has gained enormous popularity and become a kind of label for the awareness of an organization of the benefits of a designers’ way of thinking and working. Today, design thinking is increasingly understood as a way of thinking that can lead to transformation, evolution and innovation and new forms of living and working, also in terms of sport. Due to the applicability of design methods for promoting (social) innovation, design thinking has increasingly attracted the interest of scholars and practitioners. Its ability to solve more complex problems, so-called ‘wicked problems’ (Buchanan, 1992), has designated it as a promising approach for innovation, also in the non-profit, social innovation (sport) sphere. Two authors and their books have mainly contributed to the popularity of design thinking: Change by Design: How Design Thinking Transforms Organizations and Inspires Innovation by Tim Brown (2009), CEO of IDEO, one of the world’s most influential design consultancies and The Design of Business: Why Design Thinking is the Next Competitive Advantage by Roger Martin (2009), dean of the Rotman School of Management in Toronto. Although both authors define and describe design thinking differently, they both explore its role and potential in different kinds of organizations. A fundamental characteristic of design thinking is its human-centred approach, which expresses itself in the collaborative way that designers work and in participatory methods of co-creation; a shift from designing ‘for users’ to the human-centred approach of designing ‘with users’ (Miaskiewicz & Kozar, 2011). Design thinking allows high-impact solutions to emerge from below (cfr. self-organisation), rather than be imposed from above (Brown & Wyatt, 2010; Veryzer & Broja de Mozota, 2005). Design thinking applied in social innovation processes foresees

88

C. VAN TUYCKOM

the involvement and participation of communities in the whole design process, from the identification of problems and challenges to idea generation, prototyping and the evaluation of the (design) outcomes. In this participatory approach, the user is seen as a real ‘partner’ in the whole process. In our case study, various design thinking techniques (IDEO, 2005) were used to understand the socially deprived youths’ aspirations and needs. Through different activities (e.g. discussing what the cover of a magazine with ‘We app to move’ on would look like, putting ideas on a matrix based on originality and realizability, social media investigation, drawing ideas and many others), the socially deprived youth were able to see for themselves what was important and valuable with regard to the organization of sporting activities, rather than having an outsider make those assumptions for them. Brainstorms and co-creating sessions were also organized to get feedback on the ideas and to bring the coordinator, sports animators, socially deprived youth, students and other relevant local stakeholders deeper into the process. Moreover, design thinking relies on local expertise to uncover local solutions (Brown & Wyatt, 2010). Spending time with users/citizens in their own environments, rather than working on a project abstractly in another space, is an important part of the research process (Chick, 2012). Often people cannot tell what their exact needs are, but their actual behaviour can provide valuable clues about their range of unmet needs. Therefore, design thinking starts by going out into the world and observing the behaviour of the target group in their daily living environment. It is important for design thinkers to become ‘embedded’ in the lives of the people they are designing for. The case study in this chapter shows that circumstances, as well as the aspirations and needs of the socially deprived youth of ‘Buurtsport Brugge’ differs from ‘Buurtsport’ in other Flemish cities. Moreover, the young people want a platform that is exclusive to their own neighbourhood and not one that is uniform across the three socially deprived neighbourhoods. This shows that the solutions of design thinking are relevant to a unique cultural context and will not necessarily work outside that specific situation.

Conclusion There is no doubt that we live (and practise sports) in interesting times, face unprecedented challenges, as well as previously unimaginable opportunities. The big question is whether we can design effective ways of

5

‘WE APP TO MOVE’—A CO-CREATED DIGITAL …

89

navigating and innovating our future and tackling the issues of obesity, high levels of physical inactivity, the non-participation of specific groups (e.g. vulnerable people) etc. In this chapter 1 have tried to illustrate how the methodology of design thinking can help to purposefully create responses to specific challenges in social innovation. This is done by means of a case study of a co-created digital platform to support self-organized sporting activities among the socially vulnerable youth in Bruges. Self-organizing communities are increasingly perceived as flagships of social innovation in different public spheres and sectors like (neighbourhood) sports. An implication of this development is that the traditional roles of governmental actors facing and responding to social innovation are changing. As argued by Edelenbos and Meerkerk (2011), civil servants (e.g. the coordinator of neighbourhoods sports in Bruges in the case of ‘We app to move’) become less the experts but develop more into professional assistants on demand, when there is need for knowledge and information about procedures, legislation and other resources that are needed for developing and implementing the plans and ideas of the self-organising community (e.g. socially vulnerable youth in the case of ‘We app to move’). The sports animators become more and more the ambassadors of the self-organising youth groups. This implies that they signal interesting developments in the community and commit attention and importance from the (local) government side. New roles and competences for (local) governmental actors are necessary to develop effective and legitimate processes of co-creation with self-organizing groups and to make social innovation in the public (sport) sector meaningful and productive. Social innovation enables new ways of tackling social needs and creating new relationships by empowering citizens. And the methodology of design thinking seems well placed to facilitate new solutions to the challenging civic issues that face our (local) communities and society more widely. However, despite the increasing awareness of design thinking as a strategic tool for developing social innovation initiatives, the trend of ‘design for social innovation’ (Chick, 2012) is still widely underexploited in the world of sport. Although design thinkers do not have a monopoly over social innovation, they do have an important set of skills, tools and methods that guide people to new social innovative solutions or improve existing ones. They take an empathic approach and start from people. Design thinkers tend to understand the needs in a better and

90

C. VAN TUYCKOM

more empathizing way and in turn come up with solutions, alternatives and social practices that are new. Therefore, both researchers and policymakers in the world of sport need to be better aware of the role that ‘design for social innovation’ can play in addressing societal problems. After all, design thinking is about creating a better world and is more than just creativity and generating good ideas. The challenges we face, also in the world of sport, require practical, applicable and sustainable solutions, not just a myriad of new ideas. I hope that it is only a matter of time before the sports sector fully becomes part of the ‘design for social innovation’ movement. Using design thinking, the sporting world could elevate itself and disrupt innovation in different aspects. To help upscale the impact of design thinking on social (sport) innovation practices, the hope is that this chapter will inspire further explorations and possible collaboration networks in which more awareness can be created, ideas can be exchanged and combined and some of the resource challenges tackled.

References Bason, C. (2010). Leading public sector innovation. Bristol: Policy Press. Bates, S. (2012). The social innovation imperative: Create winning products, services, and programs that solve society’s most pressing challenges. New York: McGraw-Hill. Bekkers, V., Edelenbos, J., Nederhand, J., Steijn, B., Tummers, L. & Voorberg, W. (2015). The social innovation perspective in the public sector: Co-creation, self-organization and meta-governance. In J. Edelenbos, V. Bekkers & A. Steijn (Ed.), Innovation in the public sector: Linking capacity and leadership (governance and public management) (pp. 223–244). Palgrave McMillan. Bjögvinsson, E., Ehn, P. & Hillgren, P. (2012). Design things and Design Thinking: Contemporary participatory design challenges. Design Issues, 28(3), 101–116. Brown, T. (2009). Change by design: How design thinking transforms organizations and inspires innovation. New York: HarperBusiness. Brown, T. & Wyatt, J. (2010). Design Thinking for social innovation. Stanford Social Innovation Review, Winter, 29–43. Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked problems in design thinking. Design Issues, 8(2), 5–21. Cels, S., De Jong, J. & Nauta, F. (2012). Agents of change: Strategy and tactics for social innovation. Washington DC: Brookings.

5

‘WE APP TO MOVE’—A CO-CREATED DIGITAL …

91

Chesbrough, H. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Cambridge MA: Harvard Business School Press. Chesbrough, H. (2006). Open innovation: A new paradigm for understanding industrial innovation. In H. Chesbrough, W. Vanhaverbeke, & J. West (Ed.), Open Innovation: Researching a new paradigm (pp. 1–12). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Chick, A. (2012). Design for social innovation: Emerging principles and approaches. Iridescent, 2(1), 78–90. Cross, N. (2011). Design Thinking: Understanding how designers think and work. Oxford: Berg. De Knop, P. & van der Poel, H. (2006). Het sportbeleid in Nederland en Vlaanderen. In P. De Knop, B. Vanreusel & J. Scheerder (Ed.), Sportsociologie: Het spel en de spelers (pp. 63–84). Maarssen: Elsevier Gezondheidszorg. Delnoij, M. (2004). Ze zijn gewoon niet te binden: Hardlopers, atletiekverenigingen en de opkomst van lichte gemeenschappen. Unpublished MSc thesis, Universiteit van Amsterdam. Duyvendak, J. & Hurenkam, M. (Eds.). (2004). Kiezen voor de kudde: Lichte gemeenschappen en de nieuwe meerderheid. Amsterdam: Van Gennep. Edelenbos, J. & van Meerkerk, I. (2011). Institutional evolution within local democracy—Local self-governance meets local government. In J. Torfing & P. Triantafillou (Ed.), Interactive policymaking, metagovernance and democracy (pp. 169–186). Essex: ECPR Press. Goldstein, J. (1999). Emergence as a construct: History and issues. Journal of Complexity Issues in Organizations and Management, 1(1), 49–72. Hoekman, R., Breedveld, K. & Kraaykamp, G. (2017). Providing for the rich? The effect of public investments in sport on sport (club) participation of vulnerable youth and adults. European Journal for Sport and Society, 14(4), 327–347. Howalt, J. & Schwarz, M. (2010). Social innovation: Concepts, research fields and international trends. International Monitoring. Hurenkamp, M., Tonkens, E. & Duyvendak, J. (2006). Wat burgers bezielt. Een studie naar burgerinitiatieven. Den Haag: Nicis. Hylton, K. & Totten, M. (2008). Community sports development. In K. Hylton & P. Braham (Ed.), Sports development, policy, process and practice (pp. 17– 77). London: Routledge. IDEO. (2005). The field guide to human-centered design. A step-by-step guide that will get you solving problems like a designer. IDEO. Kamoji, W., Orton, L. & Williamson, M. (2009). Social innovation in Canada: An update. Ottawa: Canadian Policy Research Networks. Liedtka, J. & Ogilvie, T. (2011). Designing for growth. A Design Thinking tool kit for managers. New York: Columbia University Press.

92

C. VAN TUYCKOM

Lockwood, T. (Ed.). (2010). Design Thinking. Integrating innovation, customer experience, and brand value. New York: Allworth Press. Lorentzen, H. & Hustinx, L. (2007). Civic involvement and modernization. Journal of Civil Society, 3(2), 101–118. Martin, R. (2009). The design of business. Why Design Thinking is the next competitive advantage. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business Press. Miaskiewicz, T. & Kozar, K. (2011). Personas and user-centered design: How can personas benefit product design processes. Design Studies, 32(5), 417– 430. Moore, M. (1995). Creating public value: Strategic management in government. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Mulgan, J. (2009). The art of public strategy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Murray, R., Caulier-Grice, J., & Mulgan, G. (2010). The open book of social innovation. London: The Young Foundation & NESTA. Naert, J., Roose, R. & Vanderplasschen, W. (2018) Onderzoeksrapport Brugge(n) voor jongeren. Kwalitatieve analyse van lokale netwerkontwikkeling tussen hulp-en dienstverlening aan jongeren in kwetsbare posities. Universiteit Gent: Vakgroep Orthopedagogiek. Nederhand, J., Bekkers, V. & Voorberg, W. (2016). Self-organization and the role of government: How and why does self-organization evolve in the shadow of hierarchy? Public Management Review, 18(7), 1063–1084. Osborne, S. & Brown, L. (2011). Innovation in public services: Engaging with risk. Public Money & Management, 31(1), 4–6. Pollit, C. & Hupe, P. (2011). Talking about governments: The role of magic concepts. Public Management Review, 13(5), 641–658. Sørensen, E. & Torfing, J. (2011). Enhancing collaborative innovation in the public sector. Administration & Society, 43(8), 842–868. Stolle, D. & Hooghe, M. (2005). Inaccurate, exceptional, one-sided or irrelevant? The debate about the alleged decline of social capital and civic engagement in Western societies. British Journal of Political Science, 35(1), 149–167. Theeboom, M. & De Knop, P. (1992). Inventarisatie binnen het jeugdwelzijnswerk in Vlaanderen. In P. De Knop & L. Walgrave (Ed.), Sport als integratie. Kansen voor maatschappelijk kwetsbare jongeren (pp. 119–130). Brussel: Koning Boudewijnstichting. Theeboom, M. & De Maesschalck, P. (2006). Sporten om de hoek: Een brede kijk op Buurtsport in Vlaanderen. Sint-Niklaas: ISB. Theeboom, M., Haudenhuyse, R. & De Knop, P. (2010). Community sports development for socially deprived groups: A wider role for the commercial sports sector? A look at the Flemish situation. Sport in Society, 13(9), 1392– 1410.

5

‘WE APP TO MOVE’—A CO-CREATED DIGITAL …

93

Theeboom, M., Truyens, J. & Haudenhuyse, R. (2008). Sport en maatschappelijke achterstelling: Een verkennend onderzoek naar de bestaande initiatieven in Vlaanderen en mogelijkheden naar de toekomst. Brussel: Koning Boudewijnstichting. Van Meerkerk, I., Boonstra, B. & Edelenbos, J. (2013). Self-organization in urban regeneration: A two-case comparative research. European Planning Studies, 21(10), 1630–1652. Veryzer, R. & Borja de Mozota, B. (2005). The impact of user-oriented design on new product development: An examination of fundamental relationships. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 22(2), 128–143. Von Hippel, E. (2007). Horizontal innovation networks—by and for users. Industrial and Corporate Change, 2(1): 1–23. Voorberg, W., Bekkers, V. & Tummers, L. (2015). A systematic review of cocreation and co-production: Embarking on the social innovation journey. Public Management Review, 17 (9), 1333–1357.

CHAPTER 6

Social Innovation, Sport and Urban Planning Maja Nilssen and Anne Tjønndal

Introduction Participation in sport is often associated with a healthy and happy life. The health benefits of being physically active, either through organized sport or other leisure activities, is thoroughly documented in medical and social research (Lubans et al., 2016; Oja et al., 2015). The link between a health and participation in sport has led to the widespread belief that sport in any form is inherently good for us. In sport sociology, this link is commonly known as the ‘sport-health ideology’ (Malcolm, 2018). This ideology is supported by The World Health Organization (WHO), which has positioned sport firmly within the field of health and medicine and describes it as a fundamental part of physical activity in modern life and an important part of health promotion (European Union, 2011; WHO, 2003). As a consequence, “Sport for all” is a central part of national sport policies in

M. Nilssen (B) · A. Tjønndal Nord University, Bodø, Norway e-mail: [email protected] A. Tjønndal e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 A. Tjønndal (ed.), Social Innovation in Sport, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63765-1_6

95

96

M. NILSSEN AND A. TJØNNDAL

many European countries. The connection between sport, health promotion and physical activity can be found in 130 national policies published within Europe between 2000 and 2009 (WHO, 2011, p. 42). Despite the apparent connection between sport and health, a substantial body of research has demonstrated that traditionally organized sport is riddled with practices of social inequality and exclusion (Collins, 2014; Spaaij, Magee, & Jeans, 2014; Tjønndal, 2018a), thereby rendering it unable to fulfil its main political goal as a health-enhancing physical activity. Consequently, there is a need for further studies on how social innovations in sport interact with the public and private sector to create new and alternative modes of playing sports and leading an active, healthy lifestyle. Here, the role of sport and innovation in urban planning represents an underdeveloped field of research. In Norway, the promotion of public health is stated as a guiding principle for sustainable urban planning (Hofstad, 2011; MoE, 2008). Despite social sustainability and public health being interlinked as concepts and policy goals, the social dimension of sustainable urban development has to a large extent been neglected, even in Norway (Dempsey, Bramley, Power, & Brown, 2011; Hofstad, 2013, 2015). Therefore, knowledge is still needed about the specific role that urban planning plays in promoting sport participation and other forms of physical activity in the daily lives of inhabitants in Norwegian cities. Today, the concept of ‘the smart city’ is at the forefront of innovation in urban development and represents an increasingly popular topic for urban planners internationally (Nilssen, 2019). The growing focus on the development of successful smart cities has led to a notable upsurge of scholarly interest in the topic (e.g. Angelidou, 2015; Anthopoulos, 2017; de Jong et al., 2015; Neirotti et al., 2014; Shelton, Zook, & Wiig, 2015). The focal point of this research has largely been dominated by the technological innovations needed to make a city smart(er) (Caragliu, Del Bo, & Nijkamp, 2011; Nam & Pardo, 2011), while limited attention has been paid to the social innovations that occur within the smart city. Such social innovations in urban planning resemble what Montgomery (2014) refers to as the “happy city”—where the well-being of the citizens is at the core of urban planning. Despite the effort to be an encompassing ideal in urban planning (e.g. including high quality of life as part of the defining feature, cf. Caragliu et al., 2011), public health and sport participation are insufficiently addressed in the smart city literature. However, in the happy city physically active inhabitants are described as an important

6

SOCIAL INNOVATION, SPORT AND URBAN PLANNING

97

aspect of successful urban planning (Ballas, 2013). Arguably, a city’s most valuable asset is healthy and active citizens (WHO, 2013). In this chapter, we connect ‘the smart city’ with ‘the happy city’ to describe and analyze how social innovation, urban planning and sport can be linked together to create active and healthy citizens. We do this by using a Norwegian urban development project as an empirical case. Our aim in this chapter is to examine how social innovation in sport can be incorporated into urban planning to address the health and happiness of citizens. Consequently, this chapter offers useful insights for practitioners, e.g. public sector agents in urban planning, and scholars who are interested in smart city initiatives, urban studies, social innovation and urban sport development. In the following section we briefly describe our theoretical points of entry. We build on the smart city literature as our framework for analyzing urban planning. The concept of social innovation is here utilized to examine new links between sport and urban planning as a means of ensuring quality of life.

The Smart City and Social Innovation In recent years, there has been a notable surge in scholarly contributions about what constitutes the ‘smart’ in smart cities (Angelidou, 2015; Anthopoulos, 2017; Deakin, 2014; Kummitha & Crutzen, 2017; Nam & Pardo, 2011; Shapiro, 2006; Shelton, Zook, & Wiig, 2015). The conceptual definitions are many and varied, as are the focus and understandings of the contents. The understanding of smart cities has commonly been of a technological character, viewing smart cities as cities using new technologies (e.g. Batty et al., 2012). Such technological innovations could entail anything from the use of (new) medical instruments in health care to (new) digital service provision for inhabitants (Hartley 2005, p. 28), as well as new practices originating as a consequence of technological innovation, e.g. an app to encourage the use of public transportation in urban areas (Nilssen, 2019). However, we argue that the smartness of cities is dependent on more than the use of (new) technologies, even if the latter is often viewed as a tool for improving urban conditions. We do not intend to provide a complete overview of the smart city concept here (for a better overview, see for instance Appio, Lima, & Paroutis, 2018). Rather, our focus in this chapter is the quality of life in the smart city. As mentioned, conceptualizations of the smart city are multifaceted and varied in both scholarly definitions and applied practices. Smart

98

M. NILSSEN AND A. TJØNNDAL

cities can also vary in scope: they can be highly specialized urban initiatives, or more comprehensive initiatives (Nilssen, 2019). Urban initiatives labelled ‘smart’ have often been considered to represent ideals for holistic and sustainable development, either focusing on technology, human resources, or participatory modes of governance (Caragliu, Del Bo, & Nijkamp, 2011; Meijer & Bolívar, 2015). Even though the ‘smart’ label was originally connected to the development of information and communication technology in the 1990s (e.g.“smart technology” within telecommunication, infrastructure etc.), the concept has evolved since then. The smart city now poses a wide-ranging ideal in urban development, where information and communication technology, human capital and participatory modes of governance constitute a pool of resources which, combined, have the potential to enhance sustainability and quality of life in urban areas (Nilssen, 2019). Technology, human capital, and (participatory) governance are not aspects that constitute innovations if they are viewed separately in this context. We therefore look at the combination of these elements to discern what differentiates the smart city from other innovative initiatives. We believe that it is this multifaceted character that gives the smart city concept its appeal. Appio et al. (2018, p. 1) emphasize that smart cities as a collective aspire “to increase the competitiveness of local communities through innovation while increasing the quality of life for its citizens through better public services and a cleaner environment ”. When understanding the smart city concept as an ideal for holistic societal development, it should be considered a compilation of already existing developmental tendencies, i.e. the ‘smart city’ as the label that connects the dots for a variety of already existing activities. This also entails a more elaborate approach to the social aspect of smart cities. Empirical contributions applying a social innovation perspective to the smart city concept are scarce. For instance, Chatfield and Reddick (2016) apply social innovation as an explicit perspective to the smart city. However, although the authors implicitly touch on issues related to quality of life in the smart city, they focus on environmental sustainability issues and do not incorporate a public health perspective. Historically, innovation has its roots in academic marketing and economic literature. This means that when scholars talk about innovation they often mean entrepreneurs, businesses and private companies. Hence, innovation research has largely been centred around improvements that in some way will bring economic growth (Fuglsang, 2010; McCraw, 2007;

6

SOCIAL INNOVATION, SPORT AND URBAN PLANNING

99

Tjønndal, 2018b). Social innovation differs from the established innovation literature because it incorporates changes that are not about creating new products or new markets (Nicholls, Simon, & Gabriel, 2015). As Hartley et al. (2013) emphasize, there are other reasons, beside the demand for efficiency, that boost the need for innovation. These reasons are more proactive, in that they relate to an increase in the capacity of public sector organizations to address the growing complexity of many policy areas in order to secure a beneficial development of society. More specifically: “[p]ublic innovation that aims to foster disruptive step changes is not an all-purpose instrument that can solve all of the current challenges in the public sector” (Hartley et al., 2013, p. 828). Moore and Hartley (2008, p. 9) support this notion by saying that “innovation does not necessarily lead to improvement ”. At its core, social innovation is a normative perspective. By this we mean that it is about new ideas and improvements that are socially good (Tjønndal, 2018a; Mulgan, 2012). Hence, the concept of social innovation is often connected to improved services in the public sector and healthcare (Willumsen, Sirnes, & Ødegård, 2015). Just as technology is closely linked to the smart city literature, it is a key feature of innovation. Although technological advancement is at the core of innovation, not all new technology constitutes social innovation. For instance, the development of the atom bomb is undoubtedly a significant innovation in modern day warfare, but is not ‘socially good’. Other technological innovations are clearly social, such as the development of emergency alarm systems for the elderly, new and more advanced wheelchairs and prosthetic limbs or smart home technology. In recent years, social innovation has also been connected to sport (Peterson & Schenker, 2018). While social innovation in general is about new ideas that work to address pressing unmet needs in society (Murray et al., 2010), social innovation in sport is about new ideas that work towards solving complex social issues in a sports context (e.g. Tjønndal, 2018a). Examples of social issues in sport can be related to challenges of social exclusion (Collins, 2014), such as discrimination and gender equity (Tjønndal, 2017), ethnicity and racism (Massao & Fasting, 2010), or the working conditions of athletes. In other words, social innovation in sport can be described as new ideas aimed at making sport more socially inclusive for people of all ages and abilities. In the next part of our chapter, we describe the empirical context of our study: the Smart Bodø initiative.

100

M. NILSSEN AND A. TJØNNDAL

Context: The City of Bodø and the Smart City Initiative Bodø is a municipality located in the northern part of Norway. The municipality is relatively small on a European scale, with just over 50,000 inhabitants. When this small town was subjected to a critical juncture (cf. Collier & Collier, 2002), it prompted a need for change that led to a carte blanche context for the local authorities. This again culminated in a large-scale urban development project guided by a smart city development strategy. The urban development project providing the context for the empirical cases presented in this chapter had a rather unanticipated trigger. The origin of this smart city initiative is found in the 2012 parliamentary resolution to close down the national air force base located in the city of Bodø and relocate the base to a different region further south in Norway. A result of this resolution was that the military would (largely) withdraw from the municipality, implying an extensive loss of jobs connected to the operation of the air force base in both the public and private sector. The parliamentary resolution therefore led to a crisis state in the municipality of Bodø. What should the municipality do now? How would it replace the lost jobs? This crisis became the catalyst for a substantive and long-term urban development project consisting of The “New City, New Airport” project and The ‘Smart Bodø’ initiative. The ‘New City, New Airport’ project is specifically concerned with the development of a new urban district on the former air force base. This also entails moving the current airport in Bodø, which will make an area of 340 hectares (the same size plot as the existing city centre in Bodø) available for redevelopment. Future ideas for the development of this new area were many, among which is developing the area as a Zero Emission Neighbourhood (ZEN). The Smart Bodø initiative consists of an encompassing development strategy for urban planning in Bodø– both in the existing city and in the former air force base plot close to the current city centre. The smart city strategy began with the municipality’s participation in several research initiatives aimed at developing (new) information and communication technology (ICT) solutions. Among these projects were initiatives focusing on limiting carbon emissions, improving energy efficiency and energy saving through the use of ICT, urban mobility indicators, as well as cooperative, connected and automated mobility. However, since its initiation the strategic focus in Bodø has shifted from the incremental

6

SOCIAL INNOVATION, SPORT AND URBAN PLANNING

101

to the radical and the smart city initiative is now a broad and encompassing vision for the city’s development (for elaborate details, see Nilssen, 2019). This smart city vision is now part of the overall municipal plan for Bodø (Bodø kommune, n.d.a.). Technological innovations are integral elements in the Bodø initiative, although technology is mainly viewed as an instrument for ensuring efficiency and improvement in the city. To our knowledge, empirical examples of social innovation in sport in the context of urban planning have not yet been fully explored in the smart city initiative in Bodø. In the following section we therefore look at four distinct examples to see how sport, social innovation and urban planning are connected in the Smart Bodø initiative.

Urban Planning, Social Innovation and Sport: Four Examples from the Smart Bodø Initiative To illustrate the link between the three aspects of social innovation, sport and urban planning in smart city initiatives, we examine four empirical examples from Smart Bodø that can be viewed as social innovation in sport in the smart city: (1) Barnetråkk, (2) BUA, (3) STImuli, and (4) E-sport and Digital Kveld. Barnetråkk: Digitally Mapping Children’s Movement in the City Barnetråkk, or ‘children’s footprints’ [our translation], is a digital tool that has been developed to map children’s movements in and experiences of public spaces in the city. As a digital platform, Barnetråkk was developed as a democratic tool to engage children and youth in urban planning so that their opinions and experiences could be incorporated into the development of public spaces (Bodø Kommune, 2016). Barnetråkk allows children to digitally map their daily walking routes to school and after school activities, as well as mark places along the route—or in the city in general—that they associate with joy (such as play, sport and leisure activities) and danger (traffic, scary places or areas with scary adults and/or animals). In other words, Barnetråkk allows urban planners, public sector agencies and local politicians to see how children use the public spaces in their neighbourhoods, what they enjoy about their city and what they would like to change (Norsk design- og arkitektursenter, n.d.). However, Barnetråkk is not only meant to map children’s movements in and experiences of public spaces. The overall aim is rather to incorporate the results

102

M. NILSSEN AND A. TJØNNDAL

from the digital mapping into new and improved urban areas for local children and youth. Consequently, this initiative has an intended purpose of giving children a voice in urban planning, using technology as a tool to access their voice. This approach can therefore be considered smart, as it links technology as a key innovative measure with the city’s smart city vision—intended to improve conditions for its inhabitants. Furthermore, the digital mapping of children’s movements and experiences in public spaces is socially good, as it allows access to the experiences of a demographic group that would otherwise be difficult to obtain. As part of the Smart Bodø initiative, Barnetråkk was used in 14 different areas of the city comprising children from different schools, which enabled city planners to gain an extensive overview of how children viewed Bodø. The results were sorted into three categories: (1) positive, (2) negative and (3) activity. Barnetråkk therefore has a sport and leisure element embedded, as its main source of input is when children are active in urban areas, as is shown in the three main categories from the results. The digital mapping process demonstrated that children generally categorized the city centre as negative, due to the presence of scary people, waste and a high volume of traffic. The results also showed that children generally regarded their local neighbourhoods as positive, along with sporting facilities, school playgrounds and public parks. For the activity category, Barnetråkk indicated that shopping centres, sports facilities and public parks were the meeting places that the children most associated with activity and play (Bodø Kommune, 2016). Although this could imply that the city centre would benefit from improving its physical environment to become more inviting for children, it could also be that children spend more time in their local neighbourhoods, and consequently feel safer there. Although Bodø Municipality have done extensive work with Barnetråkk in all the major areas of the city, it is unclear how the results from the digital platform will be incorporated into the urban development of the city. The national developers of Barnetråkk have made it clear that a main point of the digital platform is that the results should be utilized in urban development. Hence, it would seem that the Smart Bodø initiative has only been partially successful in taking advantage of the possibilities the social innovation of Barnetråkk has provided for urban planners.

6

SOCIAL INNOVATION, SPORT AND URBAN PLANNING

103

BUA: A Social Entrepreneur in Sports Equipment BUA is a volunteer organization that is partly funded by the Norwegian government. BUA’s purpose and ambition is to make it easier for children, youth and families to participate and engage in sport and leisure activities by providing local communities with a library of sports equipment that can be hired free of charge (BUA, n.d.). Bodø is one of (approximately) 80 Norwegian municipalities to have established a BUA rental office for this purpose. As an organization, BUA’s core values are to make sport and leisure activities more socially inclusive by reducing the costs associated with participation and to make participation in sport more sustainable and environmentally-friendly by reducing the consumption of sports equipment for children and youth. As previously emphasized, social innovation in the context of sport and leisure concerns new ideas that work towards solving social issues such as social exclusion (cf. Collins, 2014; Tjønndal, 2018a). In this case, BUA functions as an important enabler of sport and leisure activity, and is therefore a socially good initiative that counteracts social exclusion on the basis of economic resources. BUA Bodø was established in 2017 and has been incorporated in the “Smart Bodø” initiative. The idea is to make it easier for families to engage in outdoor activities such as skiing, hiking, cycling and kayaking and to make it easier for local youth to try new sports and leisure activities without having to invest in the expensive equipment that is often associated with organized youth sport (such as ice hockey sticks, ice skates, skateboards, skis, helmets and other protective gear) (BUA Bodø, 2018). Consequently, BUA is a social entrepreneur that provides all inhabitants with the possibility to engage in sport and leisure activities independent of their socioeconomic status. BUA Bodø was started by the local Red Cross organization and is partly funded by Bodø Municipality as part of its investment in Smart Bodø. BUA Bodø is open all year round and rents equipment for winter and summer sports and leisure activities. In 2018, BUA Bodø made 10th place for the most used BUA offices nationally, with 2290 registered rentals of sporting and leisure equipment (BUA, 2019). The high rental numbers from BUA Bodø indicate that there is a need for these social entrepreneurs to keep the cost of youth sport participation and family leisure activities to a minimum. In a smart urban planning context, providing opportunities for citizens to be healthy and active is an important feature, as quality of life is an important element in

104

M. NILSSEN AND A. TJØNNDAL

the smart city. Consequently, BUA is an important initiative benefitting all citizens, which helps combat social exclusion. STImuli: The ‘500 Metres from Home’ Urban Trail Project The STImuli project is aimed at upgrading existing trails and establishing new urban trails in Bodø. The project started in 2009 (predating the initiation of the Smart Bodø initiative), but was scaled up and gained further funding from 2012–2016 as part of the new urban development strategy in Bodø (Nordland Fylkeskommune, n.d.). The main focus of the STImuli project is to create short, accessible loop trails in close proximity to every neighbourhood in the city (Salten Friluftsråd, n.d.). In short, the aim of the project is that no-one should live more than 500 metres from the nearest trail. Specifically, the city lists four target points for the project: • To contribute to an increase in active, healthy citizens • To strengthen a sense of belonging and knowledge about local nature • To increase the attractiveness of Bodø as a city to visit and live in • To reduce harm caused to the local environment by making sustainable leisure activities more readily available to citizens. Additionally, a vital part of the project is to ensure that all the trails are well marked and advertised so that they are easy to spot for people with little experience of hiking and outdoor activities. The trails included in STImuli are aimed at walking/hiking activities, cycling and off-road cycling (Bodø Kommune, n.d.). The project is part of Bodø’s urban planning activities and aspires to encourage inhabitants to adopt a healthy and active lifestyle (Nordland Fylkeskommune, n.d.). The municipality’s vision is that the STImuli project will contribute to leisure and sporting activities that are environmentally-friendly, while simultaneously making Bodø a more attractive city to live in. This initiative therefore explicitly links the three aspects of social innovation, sport and urban planning, and through the bridging of these aspects provides an opportunity to ensure quality of life in the (smart) city.

6

SOCIAL INNOVATION, SPORT AND URBAN PLANNING

105

Digital Kveld In 2018, Bodø Municipality introduced a new concept called Digital Kveld—or ‘Digital Evening’ [our translation]—in the city’s public library. Digital Kveld is hosted every Wednesday and Sunday, is free of charge and is open to children and youth aged between 9–14 years. The purpose of Digital Kveld is to provide local children with a meeting place in which to play computer games or PlayStation and to learn how to use digital tools, such as PC, Mac and iPads, without having to buy expensive games, computer programs or gaming consoles (Stormen, n.d.). As an expansion of Digital Kveld, Bodø Municipality hosted its very first esports competition in November 2018 (Digital Kveld, 2018). The esports tournament attracted some 150 local children, with competitions being held in OverWatch, Golf with your Friends, Fortnite, Minecraft, FIFA, Mario Kart 8 and Super Smash Bros WII U. Like Digital Kveld, entrance to the esports competition was free of charge, thereby allowing the children to participate in all the games or any game of their choice. Like BUA, this initiative is socially good, as it helps combat social exclusion on the basis of socioeconomic status. Furthermore, Digital Kveld can be considered environmentally-friendly as it provides children and youth with Esports and other digital equipment during the events, and therefore could limit the consumption of such equipment. Esports and events such as Digital Kveld have been met with some resistance in the media, especially when discussed in relation to more traditional sports. The arguments against esports are often centred on the fact that these activities do not involve physical activity and are therefore not considered to be health promoting in the same way as other sports. While it is true that most esports do not involve physical activity (the exception being games such as Wii Sports and new games using virtual reality (VR) technology), engaging children and youth in esports can still have positive health benefits in terms of social and mental health. Playing games online with peers opens up a whole new world of possibilities in terms of digital friendships and digital communities. In other words, gaming and esports provide many young people with a feeling of belonging and acceptance amongst like-minded peers, which is an important element for ensuring quality of life. Consequently, such social and mental health benefits of playing esports should not be overlooked when exploring the link between social innovation, technology and sport in urban planning.

106

M. NILSSEN AND A. TJØNNDAL

Smart Bodø: An Integrated Approach to Urban Planning, Social Innovation and Sport? Separately and collectively, the four empirical examples discussed here illustrate how social innovation, technology and sport can be integrated into urban planning. Particularly, the cases Barnetråkk and Digital Kveld demonstrate how technology, often highlighted as an important factor in the smart city literature and the innovation literature, can be used to further social innovations aimed at improving the quality of life for children and youth living in urban areas. The municipality also explicitly states that proactive projects such as Barnetråkk are meant to provide a new arena for citizen participation in urban planning. The development of Barnetråkk can thus be described as a social innovation that improves children’s possibilities (and democratic right) of being involved in urban development in Norwegian cities. As a social innovation, Barnetråkk is also connected to sport in that most of the positive markings that children make in their city maps are associated with sport and leisure activities. During the Smart Bodø initiative, Bodø Municipality did extensive work with the Barnetråkk digital platform in schools in all parts of the city. However, it is still unclear how the results from Barnetråkk will be used in the urban development of the new areas of Bodø. This means that to this day, Barnetråkk is only partially successful as a participatory arena, because the digital platform alone is only intended as a way of making it easier for urban planners to understand the needs and wishes of local children. However, the most extensive part, namely integrating the results into new urban development projects, still remains elusive in the Smart Bodø initiative. This can be connected to the general critique of the smart city literature that simply implementing new technological tools is superficial and not sufficient to ensure a good quality of life for citizens. Out of the four empirical examples, BUA is perhaps the most ‘classic’ example of social innovation in sport. As a project, BUA has a clear aim of contributing to social improvement in a specific context (cf. Murray, 2010). Incorporating the costs of running the BUA rental services into the public expenditure for urban development illustrates how social innovation, sport and urban development can be integrated into the public policy of the city. The number of children growing up in low-income families in Bodø is increasing (Pettersen, 2016). This increase in numbers,

6

SOCIAL INNOVATION, SPORT AND URBAN PLANNING

107

together with the increased rental activity from BUA Bodø in 2018, indicates that there is a need for continued efforts to lower the cost of sport participation for children and youth locally. Another empirical example that is aimed at young people is the plan to create an outdoor skateboarding park in one of the vacant public spaces that will appear due to the moving of the airport. While both the BUA project and the Esports and Digital Kveld initiative specifically target children, youth and to some extent low-income families, the STImuli project has a broader aim in its vision to ensure that all citizens have immediate access to urban trails and hiking paths. Despite the difference in demographic scope, BUA, and the STImuli project are similar in that they all represent ways of transforming sport and closely integrating it into sport, play and physical activity in urban planning. However, these two cases are not examples of how new technology is integrated into social innovation, sport and urban development, as is highlighted in the smart city literature. Rather, these examples can be viewed as social innovations that represent a closer link between sport and urban development – in line with the dominant sport-health ideology of western societies today. Moreover, BUA and the STImuli project do not reflect technological transformation in the same way that the Barnetråkk and the Esports and Digital Kveld initiatives do. The aim of this chapter has been to explore how social innovation in sport can be incorporated in urban planning to address the health and happiness of citizens. We have addressed this by using four empirical examples that connect social innovation and sport with urban planning in the Smart Bodø initiative. A central limitation of our discussion of these empirical examples is that the Smart Bodø initiative is ongoing. The airport in question has not yet been moved, which means that apart from BUA and STImuli, these examples represent cases that are still under development. Therefore, a key aspect of the Smart Bodø initiative will be to explore how Barnetråkk, Digital Kveld and the outdoor skateboarding park will continue to develop in the future. Will they still be prioritized in the public expenditure for urban development in the future? Will new emerging technologies play a role in shaping social innovations in sport? Or will Smart Bodø eventually move away from integrating sport into urban planning for an enhanced quality of life?

108

M. NILSSEN AND A. TJØNNDAL

References Angelidou, M. (2015). Smart cities: A conjuncture of four forces. Cities, 47, 95–106. Anthopoulos, L. (2017). Smart utopia VS smart reality: Learning by experience from 10 smart city cases. Cities, 63, 128–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cit ies.2016.10.005. Appio, F. P., Lima, M., & Paroutis, S. (2018). Understanding Smart Cities: Innovation ecosystems, technological advancements, and societal challenges. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. Ballas, D. (2013). What makes a ‘happy city’? Cities, 32(1), 39–50. Batty, M., Axhausen, K. W., Giannotti, F., Pozdnoukhov, A., Bazzani, A., Wachowicz, M., . . . Portugali, Y. (2012). Smart cities of the future. The European Physical Journal Special Topics, 214(1), 481–518. https://doi.org/ 10.1140/epjst/e2012-01703-3. Bodø Kommune. (n.d.). STImuli—fra senga til Bestemorenga [STImuli—from the bed to the trail]. Retrieved 11th January 2019 from: https://bodo. kommune.no/friluftsliv/stimuli-fra-senga-til-bestemorenga-article47905-199. html. Bodø Kommune. (2016). Barnetråkk—Resultatrapport [Barnetråkk—Results]. Retrieved 7th February 2019 from: https://bodo.kommune.no/getfile.php/ Kurs/Scrap/Kari%20sin%20kursmappe/Rapport%20barnetråkk.pdf. Bodø kommune. (n.d.). Strategisk næringsplan 2017–2021. Retrieved 17th April 2018 from: https://bodo.kommune.no/getfile.php/Borgerportalen/ N%C3%A6ring%20og%20Utvikling/Strategisk%20n%C3%A6ringsplan/Strate gisk%20n%C3%A6ringsplan.pdf. Bodø Skateboardklubb. (2018). Nyttårstale [New Year News]. Retrieved 11th January 2019 from: http://bodoskateboardklubb.com/nyttarstale-2018/# more-2106. BUA Bodø. (2018). BUA Utlånssentral [BUA Rental Station]. Retrieved 7th February 2019 from: https://www.facebook.com/pg/BUABODO/about/? ref=page_internal. BUA. (n.d.). Om Oss [About Us]. Retrieved 7th February 2019 from: https:// www.bua.io/artikkel/om-oss. BUA. (2019). BUA ti-på-topp 2018 [BUA Top Ten 2018]. Retrieved 7th February 2019 from: https://www.facebook.com/bua.io/photos/a.154140 0589504106/2097953783848781/?type=3&theater. Caragliu, A., Del Bo, C., & Nijkamp, P. (2011). Smart cities in Europe. Journal of Urban Technology, 18(2), 65–82. Chatfield, A. T., & Reddick, C. G. (2016). Smart city implementation through shared vision of social innovation for environmental sustainability: A case study of Kitakyushu. Japan. Social Science Computer Review, 34(6), 757–773.

6

SOCIAL INNOVATION, SPORT AND URBAN PLANNING

109

Collier, R. B., & Collier, D. (2002). Shaping the political arena. Critical junctures, the labor movement, and regime dynamics in Latin America (2nd ed.). Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press. Collins, M. (2014). Sport and social exclusion. London: Routledge. de Jong, M., Joss, S., Schraven, D., Zhan, C., & Weijnen, M. (2015). Sustainable–smart–resilient–low carbon–eco–knowledge cities; making sense of a multitude of concepts promoting sustainable urbanization. Journal of Cleaner Production, 109, 25–38. Deakin, M. (Ed.). (2014). Smart cities: Governing, modelling and analysing the transition. New York: Routledge. Dempsey, N., Bramley, G., Power, S., & Brown, C. (2011). The social dimension of sustainable development: Defining urban social sustainability. Sustainable Development, 19(5), 289–300. Digital Kveld. (2018). Bodøs første E-sport konkurranse [Bodø’s first E-sport Competition]. Retrieved 7th February 2019 from: https://www.facebook. com/events/544735512617976/. European Union. (2011). Developing the European dimension in sport. Retrieved 7th February 2019 from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM%3Aef0025. Fuglsang, L. (2010). Bricolage and invisible innovation in public service innovation. Journal of Innovation Economics, 5(1), 67. Hartley, J. (2005). Innovation in governance and public services: Past and present. Public Money and Management, 25(1), 27–34. Hartley, J., Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2013). Collaborative Innovation: A viable alternative to market competition and organizational entrepreneurship. Public Administration Review, 73(6), 821–830. Hofstad, H. (2011). Healthy urban planning: Ambitions, practices and prospects in a Norwegian context. Planning Theory & Practice, 12(3), 387–406. Hofstad, H. (2013). Håndtering av “wicked problems” i kommunal planlegging. Lokal oversettelse av målsettingene om bærekraftig utvikling og bedre folkehelse i ulike planleggingspraksiser (Doctoral dissertation). Oslo: University of Oslo. Hofstad, H. (2015). Folkehelse—vitalisering av sosial bærekraft i kompakt byutvikling? In G. S. Hanssen, H. Hofstad & I. L. Saglie (Eds.), Kompakt byutvikling. Muligheter og utfordringer (pp. 207–218). Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Kummitha, R. K. R., & Crutzen, N. (2017). How do we understand smart cities? An evolutionary perspective. Cities, 67, 43–52. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.cities.2017.04.010. Lubans, D., Richards, J., Hillman, C., Faulkner, G., Beauchamp, M., Nilsson, M…..Biddle, S. (2016). Physical activity for cognitive and mental health in youth: A systematic review of mechanisms, Pediatrics, 138(3), 1–13.

110

M. NILSSEN AND A. TJØNNDAL

Malcolm, D. (2018). Sport, medicine and health: The medicalization of sport?. London: Routledge. Massao, P. B., & Fasting, K. (2010). Race and racism: Experiences of black Norwegian athletes. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 45(2), 147–162. McCraw, T. K. (2007). Prophet of innovation. Cambridge: Belknap Harvard. Meijer, A. & Bolívar, M. P. R. (2015). Governing the smart city: A review of the literature on smart urban governance. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852314564308. MoE. (2008). Ot. Proposition No. 32 (2007–2008), Om lov om planlegging og byggesaksbehandling (plan- og bygningsloven), [Proposition on the Norwegian Planning and Building Act]. Oslo: Miljøverndepartementet (Ministry of Environment). Montgomery, C. (2014). Happy city: Transforming our lives through urban design. New York: Farrar Straus Giroux. Moore, M., & Hartley, J. (2008). Innovations in governance. Public Management Review, 10(1), 3–20. Mulgan, G. (2012). The theoretical foundation of Social Innovation. In A. Nicholls & A. Murdock (Eds.), Social innovation: Blurring boundaries to reconfigure markets. Palgrave Macmillian: Basingstoke. Murray, R., Calulier-Grice, J. & Mulgan, G. (2010). Open book of social innovation. Retrieved 6th January 2016 from: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/pol icies/innovation/policy/social-innovation/. Nam, T., & Pardo, T. A. (2011). Smart city as urban innovation: Focusing on management, policy, and context. Paper presented at the ICEGOV 2011, Tallinn, Estonia. Neirotti, P., De Marco, A., Cagliano, A. C., Mangano, G., & Scorrano, F. (2014). Current trends in smart city initiatives: Some stylised facts. Cities, 38, 25–36. Nicholls, A., Simon, J. & Gabriel, M. (2015). Introduction: Dimensions of social innovation. In A. Nicholls, J. Simon og M. Gabriel (Eds.), New Frontiers in Social Innovation Research. Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillian. Nilssen, M. (2019). To the smart city and beyond? Developing a typology of smart urban innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 142, 98–104. Nordland Fylkeskommune. (n.d.). STImuli—fra senga til Bestemorenga [STImuli—from the bed to the trail]. Retrieved 11th January 2019 from: https://www.nfk.no/_f/ia67fe6e6-cf3f-4488-a21b-12b9b3c46c6f/STImul i,%20Bj%C3%B8rn%20Godal.pdf. Norsk design- og arkitektursenter. (n.d.). Barnetråkk. Retrieved 7th February 2019 from: www.barnetrakk.no.

6

SOCIAL INNOVATION, SPORT AND URBAN PLANNING

111

Oja, P., Titze, S., Kokko, S., Kujala, U.M., Heinonen, A., Kelly, P. … & Foster, C. (2015). Health benefits of different sport disciplines for adults: systematic review of observational and intervention studies with meta-analysis, British Journal of Sports Medicine, 49(7), 434–440. Peterson, T., & Schenker, K. (2018). Sport and social entrepreneurship in Sweden. New York: Springer Publishing. Pettersen, S. (2016). 550 barn lever i fattige familier i Bodø [550 children live in poor families in Bodø]. Retrieved February 7th 2019 from: https://www. an.no/debatt/550-barn-lever-i-fattige-familier-i-bodo/o/5-4-392619. Salten Friluftsråd. (n.d.). STImuli—En målrettet satsing på bostedsnære stier og løyper [STImuli—improving urban hiking trails]. Retrieved 11th January 2019 from: http://friluft.salten.no/?id=1949858231. Shelton, T., Zook, M., & Wiig, A. (2015). The ‘actually existing smart city’. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 8, 13–25. https://doi. org/10.1093/cjres/rsu026. Shapiro, J. M. (2006). Smart Cities: Quality of life, productivity, and the growth effects of human capital. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 88(2), 324– 335. Spaaij, R., Magee, J., & Jeanes, R. (2014). Sport and social exclusion in global society. London: Routledge. Stormen. (n.d.). Digital Kveld. Retrieved 7th February 2019 from: https://sto rmen.no/program/digital-kveld-article2805-468.html?fbclid=IwAR0jOix8xB b8Ea89GhgiOpAZMfEcruojhngCE7E00taNvoVL307Omkcb1yM. Tjønndal, A. (2017). ‘I don’t think they realise how good we are’: Innovation, inclusion and exclusion in women’s Olympic boxing. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/1012690217715642. Tjønndal, A. (2018a). Vilje til inklusjon— Studier av innovasjon for sosial inkludering i idrett [The Intention to Include: Studies of Innovation for Social Inclusion in Sport] (Doctoral dissertation). Bodø: Nord University. Tjønndal, A. (2018b). Sport innovation: Developing a typology. European Journal for Sport and Society, 15(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/161 38171.2017.1421504. Willumsen, E., Sirnes, T., & Ødegård, A. (2015). Innovasjon innen helse og velferd—sosial innovasjon. In E. Willumsen & A. Ødegård (Eds.), Sosial Innovasjon—fra politikk til tjenesteutvikling. Fagbokforlaget: Bergen. WHO. (2003). Health and development through physical activity and sport. Geneva: World Health Organization. WHO. (2011). promoting sport and enhancing health in the European union countries: A policy content analysis to support action. Copenhagen: World Healh Organization. WHO. (2013). Healthier and happier cities for all —A transformative approach for safe, inclusive, sustainable and resilient societies. Retrieved 30th August 2018 from: http://www.euro.who.int/data/assets/pdf_file/0003/361434/ consensus-eng.pdf?ua=1.

CHAPTER 7

Social Innovation and Challenges in Youth-Based Sport Practices: An Analysis of State-Led Programs Selçuk Açıkgöz, Reinhard Haudenhuyse, and Cem Tınaz

Introduction Sport-for-development (SFD) projects have become very popular, particularly so in the last 15 years (Burnett, 2015; Sanders, Phillips, & Vanreusel, 2014). Both academic and practical work has expanded throughout the world, and the model of ‘project funding’ has become the engine of pervasive practices. The implementation process of these

S. Açıkgöz (B) Trakya University, Edirne, Turkey e-mail: [email protected] R. Haudenhuyse Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium e-mail: [email protected] C. Tınaz Istanbul Bilgi University, Istanbul, Turkey e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 A. Tjønndal (ed.), Social Innovation in Sport, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63765-1_7

113

114

S. AÇIKGÖZ ET AL.

projects and how are they constructed within the concept of governance or partnership have been widely discussed (e.g. Goodwin & Grix, 2011; Grix, 2010; Grix & Phillpots, 2011; Lindsey, 2008, 2017; Sanders et al., 2014). However, we have still limited knowledge about how ‘projects’ unfold outside western countries or western-based non-governmental organizations (NGOs) operating in the majority world. Recent studies have highlighted that the organizational (in-)capacity of organizations has caused severe problems in the implementation of these ‘developmental interventions’ (e.g. Pritchett, Woolcock, & Andrews, 2013). Pritchett et al. (2013) articulate this argument by using the concept ‘organizational trap’, which refers to the hard-to-close gap of organizational capacity (and resources) between western countries and the majority world. The internal complexities of NGOs encourage state and international organizations to take part in the operations of SFD projects run by NGOs, which increases their dependence on external sources. Previous studies have also found that dependency on state actors inevitably increases their involvement in important decisions (Phillpots, Grix, & Quarmby, 2010; Sanders et al., 2014). As a result of such deficiencies and challenges, public organizations and NGOs, either together or separately, develop their own innovative ways of addressing social issues such as social exclusion, unemployment or poverty. Organizational innovation requires changes in management models in coherence with local capabilities and needs (Hartley, 2005; Tjønndal, 2017), rather than models causing what has been termed ‘histoincompatibility’. This term describes the disharmony between (external) organizational models and local characteristics. For NGOs, an increasing organizational capacity can be achieved through innovative strategies related to policy environment and partnering with local institutions (Osborne, Chew, & McLaughlin, 2008). Sport and social innovation literature refer to, for example, establishing open communicative systems, involving end-users in operation processes and co-creating programs with several NGOs to increase organizational capacity for sport organizations (Svensson & Mahoney, 2020; Tjønndal & Nilssen, 2019). Ringuet-Riot, Hahn, and James (2013) mentioned that innovation in organizational systems can facilitate performance improvement and solve problems that hinder potentially impactful projects. Identifying and overcoming problems that challenge organizations to exert social change in communities has also been one of the main topics in the SFD literature (Joachim, Schulenkorf, Schlenker, & Frawley, 2020). However, development practices

7

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND CHALLENGES IN YOUTH-BASED …

115

contain dichotomies in terms of actualizing organizational innovation (Prichett et al., 2013): local or exported management models; heuristic or modern approaches; and leadership or committee-oriented work. Reducing these dichotomies requires a practice-based understanding of organizational processes of SFD programs conducted outside the western world that would reveal intraorganizational and partnership challenges. Using the social innovation framework of Hartley (2005), the aim of this chapter is to analyze a sport-for-development project, ‘Apprentices Becoming Stars’, conducted by an NGO and local public sport institution in a challenging setting. As an additional analytical lens, we benefit from current SFD literature that details various social innovation practices (i.e. design thinking practice, servant leadership). The research questions that guide our analysis are the following: (i) Taking into account the challenging and under-resourced context, how is the project operated and managed; (ii) What are the encountered problems during implementation of the project; and (iii) How does the presence/absence of social innovation affect the outcomes of the project? Within this study, we also discuss the operations and underlying mechanisms of an SFD program conducted in Turkey, a geographical area that has to date not been included in SFD research. In the next section, we begin by explaining the role of the Turkish Ministry of Youth and Sport (MYS), the main funder of sport-based youth projects in Turkey, including the project analyzed in this study.

Empirical Context: Sport and Youth Projects in Turkey The Ministry of Youth and Sport (MYS) was founded in 2011. Between 2012 and 2018, the MYS supported 3,341 youth and sports projects with a total of 224.5 million Turkish Lira (at the end of December 2018, approx. 36 million Euro) (MYS, 2018). Although youth and sports policies are still in development, MYS organizes projects with a diversity of aims, such as social cohesion, sport participation, teaching moral values and social mobility (e.g. Açıkgöz, Haudenhuyse, & A¸sçı, 2019). However, the most common aim is related to developing infrastructure (i.e. construction work, such as building local youth centers and sport facilities). These projects cost more than social projects because they develop infrastructure and building construction (MYS, 2016). However, very little information is available about how these projects unfold in

116

S. AÇIKGÖZ ET AL.

terms of their implementation by funded NGOs and the opportunities and challenges that unfold in the implementation process. Relatedly, previous studies have argued that the centralized management model of MYS has a limiting role in the capacity development of local public institutions, sport federations and NGOs (Açıkgöz et al., 2019; Erturan-Ogut & Sahin, 2015; Tınaz, Turco, & Salisbury, 2014). Although the funds allocated to NGOs have been reduced, the ‘project’ model is still viewed as the most effective partnership type between MYS and NGOs (MYS, 2018). The projects are largely implemented by the NGOs. The existing information about the funded NGOs show that most funds are allocated to relatively small NGOs (MYS, 2014). Relatedly, Erturan-Ogut and Sahin (2015) highlight the dominance of clientelist relations in the selection and budgeting processes of the sport federations in Turkey. They also claim that the political ideologies of the federations determine whether they will receive adequate funding from the government. However, such mechanisms are not unique to the Turkish context (e.g. Collins, 2014; Rich & Misener, 2019).

The ‘Governance’ Issue and Social Innovation Governance and social innovation are inextricably linked concepts. Positive outcomes highly depend on creating solid partnerships and innovative tools in development programs. Hartley (2005) emphasized the importance of organizational models and their characteristics in achieving social innovation. Hartley (2005) defined three governance paradigms—‘traditional’ public administration, ‘new’ public management and ‘networked’ governance—to elaborate on the features of such models and whether they enable social innovation. These paradigms are classified based on five main parameters: innovation, improvement, the role of policy makers, the role of public managers and the role of population. The approach of the management model to each parameter defines the extent to which innovative practices can be effectively used. The main features of traditional public administration are framed as stable, homogenous, hierarchical and prioritizing the public good. New public management, on the other hand, is classified as competitive, atomized, market-oriented and prioritizing public choice. The third model, networked governance, differs from first two as a hybrid model that is open to diversity and continuous change, is civil society oriented, prioritizes partnerships and considers ‘public value’ its key concept (Hartley, 2005). Traditional public administration,

7

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND CHALLENGES IN YOUTH-BASED …

117

however, is the most common approach, particularly in public institutions (and in Turkey). It is a strict model that is often not conducive to social innovation. This feature of public administrations also affects partnerships with NGOs which have been said to be ineffective in terms of developing long-term impacts (Haudenhuyse, Theeboom, & Nols, 2013). This is due to problems such as organizational incapacity, a lack of resources, shortterm focus and reproductive hegemonic norms (Kidd, 2008; Lindsey, 2017; Sanders et al., 2014; Schulenkorf, 2013). Partnerships also do not function well in these conditions, as they mainly produce asymmetrical power relations: uneven structural, financial differences between organizations prevent partnerships, leading central organizations to take coercive measures to fulfil requirements (Goodwin & Grix, 2011). Thus, governments seeking to maintain power make use of several strategies. The ever-changing nature of partnership types and their impact on NGOs can result in projects with disappointing outcomes that fail to address social problems and include target groups (Fahlén, Eliasson, & Wickman, 2015; Welty Peachey, Cohen, Shin, & Fusaro, 2018). One of the major issues in the implementation of projects in the majority world is organizational incapacity. Prichett et al. (2013) describe the reason for organizational failure as ‘isomorphic mimicry’, which refers to the imitation of modern institutions from the minority world, despite their organizational and technical deficiencies. Prichett et al. (2013) have also referred to the inertia of organizations in developing their organizational and technical capacity as the ‘capability trap’. This leads many institutions to (re-)produce ‘failed projects’ due to persistent structural problems that have existed for decades (e.g. an incoherent relationship between the adapted model and organizational structure). Although similar problems occur in the context of SFD (Schulenkorf, Sherry, & Rowe, 2016; Welty Peachey et al., 2018), socially innovative SFD practices have also emerged. Studies have offered practical suggestions for programs hoping to find innovative solutions to their organizational problems. For instance, Joachim et al. (2020) accentuate ‘design thinking’ practices for SFD programs. Design thinking is a human-centered approach for organizations which prioritizes beneficiaries. It focuses on different points such as deep user understanding, diversity of perspectives, testing for user feedback, futuristic thinking and bias towards action (Joachim et al., 2020; Svensson & Cohen, 2020). This approach can support traditional organizations that face organizational inertia and have difficulties in creating public value in

118

S. AÇIKGÖZ ET AL.

under-resourced communities. Design thinking encourages the consideration of end-users’ viewpoints during program implementation and, moreover, seeks opportunities to recruit community members who were previously beneficiaries (Joachim et al., 2020). Design thinking practices also follow a heuristic approach based on learning from possible pitfalls and overcoming them with immediate action. Applying socially innovative strategies, such as design thinking, requires suitable leadership. In traditional public administrations, leaders can play a disabling role against innovation, which is often due to bureaucratic challenges or resistance to change (Hartley, 2005). Hartley (2005) argued that public officials and managers working in a traditional management model often comply to conservative political and managerial narratives and, consequently, will work ‘just enough’ within the policy boundaries that are set for them. Nurturing social innovation in such context will thus require a substantial change of leadership perspective. Welty Peachey and Burton (2017) suggest ‘servant leadership’ for SFD programs. Barbuto, Gottfredson, and Searle (2014, p. 2) describe servant leadership as an ‘altruistic-based form of leadership in which leaders emphasize the needs and development of others, primarily their followers’. Servant leadership engages with problems directly, supports and empowers local staff, and connects with program users to work towards social change (Welty Peachey & Burton, 2017). This model holds the promise of motivating public officials to contribute to social change programs. Based on the Hartley’s (2005) framework, we analyse the social innovation dimension of the project ‘Apprentices Becoming Stars’. Besides detailing the current features that can be related to socially innovative practices, we will also explore possible alternatives and highlight missed opportunities that could be addressed toward improving the success of the project. To do so, we apply two concepts: design thinking and servant leadership (e.g. Joachim et al., 2020; Svensson & Mahoney, 2020).

Methodology In this chapter we focus our analysis on the implementation of a sportbased project conducted in partnership with a provincial institution of youth and sport (GSIM) and a local NGO. A single case study perspective was adopted based on our specific interest in the operations of this type of SFD program (Hodge & Sharp, 2016). The study used an interpretivism approach that is aimed at understanding the complex world of

7

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND CHALLENGES IN YOUTH-BASED …

119

lived experience from the perspective of those who live it. In the case study we focus on the experiences of the staff during implementation of the project and reflect also how these experiences affected the project outcomes. The selected case is entitled ‘Apprentices Becoming Stars’, a project conducted in Turkey’s capital city Ankara. The project participants were youth apprentices between the ages of 15 and 21 working in several different industrial areas in Ankara. The main objective of this program was to provide social inclusion opportunities through sport activities (MYS, 2016). The project’s main activities were organizing football tournaments for participants and social trips in the city. This project was selected for this study because it employed football as a development tool to address the problems of underserved young people. We conducted 10 semi-structured interviews with staff working in the provincial institution of youth and sport (GSIM), NGO coordinators and teachers/school coordinators from Vocational Training Centers (Table 7.1). Purposive and snowballing sampling strategies were used to select the research participants. The snowballing strategy was particularly crucial to reach out to the project staff, as there was no available contact information for staff and other stakeholders. The participants were mainly asked about the operation of the project and the areas that needed improvement. We adopted a thematic analysis as a data analysis strategy, which encompassed the following steps: (i) familiarization and coding, (ii) theme development, refinement and naming, and (iii) writing up (Braun, Clarke, & Weate, 2016). Ethical clearance was provided by Marmara University in Turkey. Permissions were granted from stakeholder organizations to collect data from public officials and NGO staff. Table 7.1 Research participants Number of participants Case—Ankara, Turkey

Total

NGO project coordinators Provincial institution of youth and sport (GSIM) Head of youth projects (Local Institution) School coordinators

4 3 2 2 10

120

S. AÇIKGÖZ ET AL.

Analysis Our analysis is based on Hartley’s (2005) concept of ‘traditional public administration’, to define the status of the project, and is in discussion with the relevant SFD literature, which has allowed us to explicate project operations and problems in relation to social innovation. Three themes were identified regarding the implementation process of the project: (i) intentions and aims, (ii) coordination and partnership, and (iii) project implementation problems. Intentions and Aims The general intentions of the project implementers were the personal and social development of young participants. In our case, the uncertainty of target goals and a lack of enthusiasm behind the project led to organizational problems. When defining the project, the executive in charge of youth projects downplayed the urgent needs of young apprentices: Previously, we have conducted projects on various subjects, but we did not do anything [for] apprentices… By doing this project, we aimed to increase the loyalty of these young people towards the state, make them feel that we cared about them [and] wanted to raise awareness [about their problems]. (Youth Projects Executive, MYS)

The executive’s statements highlight the typical governmental mentality of ‘care’ for all people in every field reaching out to every person to reflect the image of ‘caring ’. Following a traditional public administration approach, the program settled on doing ‘just enough’ for young people, which consisted of raising awareness about social opportunities. A design thinking practice, in contrast, would prioritize ‘value’ in creating programs and aim to improve the lives of participants (Joachim et al., 2020). Relatedly, the NGO coordinator of the ‘Apprentices Becoming Stars’ project summarized the intention of state-funded sport-based projects in general, which also revealed the priorities of this project: First of all, I think, a project – a serious project I mean – should be satisfying. [It should not be done to] just to make a project, make money or earn fame. (NGO Coordinator 1)

7

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND CHALLENGES IN YOUTH-BASED …

121

A participant claimed that many NGOs that are supported by MYS set out to gain some kind of fame or recognition (e.g. to gain political or economic power, conduct more partnerships with the state or promote their own NGOs). MYS officials also had a similar lack of interest in the project in that their only aim was to get the job done. This meant that the needs of the young participants in the project were not always prioritized: As I said, besides our manager, I don’t think other people cared much [about] the socialization of young people. They were just men who turned up for work because they had to be there. They were not really bothered about the development of the youth. (Local public institution, official 2)

Servant leadership could be the ideal model for managers committed to personally engaging with issues and nurturing the ability to motivate people, rather than only giving ‘remote responsibility’ (e.g. Svensson & Mahoney, 2020; Welty Peachey & Burton, 2017). In our case, however, the lack of leadership and the failure to recruit the ‘right people’, left the program run by public officials acting as ‘clerks’, who were barely implementing the official program (Hartley, 2005, p. 30). Besides the unwillingness amongst project staff, the way in which the partner NGO was selected by GSIM signalled the problems ahead. The official from the local public institution explained the genesis of the project in the following way: The idea of the project came from MYS executives; they looked for NGOs who conducted projects with young apprentices or similar employment lines, and then they asked this NGO if they want[ed] to do it. I am not sure if it was the project NGO [that] wanted to coordinate [it in] the first place. (Local public institution, official 1)

The intention of MYS to find an NGO that could organize a project for youth apprentices provides insight on the rationale of the governing body, which was not concerned with finding the most suitable NGO for young apprentices. This ill-defined partnership not only debilitated the program process, but also reveals a missed opportunity to create a ‘ripple effect’ that could have initiated policy change and significantly impacted the lives of young apprentices deprived of social rights (Brake & Misener, 2020). Eventually, in this case, a disagreement evolved between the partners.

122

S. AÇIKGÖZ ET AL.

Coordination and Partnership Although the main organization, GSIM, organized operations in a traditional way, the idea of building partnerships was something new for them. The coordination process involved several different parties, which made the implementation process more complex. Since the project had initially started in schools with in-school football tournaments, school coordinators had to be informed about the project and give their permission for young apprentices to participate in out-of-school activities and final games. One of the coordinators from the NGO stated: School principals, deputy principals, the GSIM director and his assistants were very helpful in this matter. We could not communicate with the children personally because there were too many of them (some 600 children) [who] came from seven (apprenticeship) schools. It was not easy… (NGO coordinator 2)

The inexperience of the NGO forced local public sport institutions to intervene and take more responsibility for the project than had been envisaged: As the organization was an NGO, it had to get permission from the schools in order to invite young people from the schools. It had to get consent from the governorship, [and] […] from the provincial institution for national education. As the NGO could not do this itself, we had to get involved. (Local public institution, official 1)

The statement indicates that the partnership that allowed the NGO to overcome bureaucratic hurdles concerning permissions was not planned for. This reveals another missed opportunity for the project to have involved partners before these problems occurred. Activating partnerships only when problems come up, again, shows the traditional approach of the main organization, the provincial institution of youth and sport (GSIM). This prevented organizations from developing their social networks, developing trust and forming common objectives (Coalter, 2013; Welty Peachey et al., 2018). This is rather common in SDF projects in that public institutions expect NGOs to take on more responsibility in the process of project implementation and involvement of the public institutions only when necessary, leading to power imbalances (Welty Peachey et al., 2018). Building partnerships can be considered innovative in itself

7

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND CHALLENGES IN YOUTH-BASED …

123

for introvert, hierarchical public institutions. Yet the partnership between GSIM and the NGO did not lead to the improvement of this project. It only allowed the project to get started with the involvement of GSIM in order to gain permission for youth participation (Hartley, 2005). Project Implementation Problems Most of the participants graduated from Vocational Training Centers (VTCs) a few months after the project was started. For this reason, the VTC coordinators recruited new young participants in the project. Although’Apprentices Becoming Stars’ was ‘designed’ by the NGO, NGO staff members were not involved in the selection process of participants. This reflects asymmetrical power relations: recruitment was initially led by the local sport institution, while the rest of operations were left to the NGO who had limited organizational staff (Goodwin & Grix, 2011). The problems leading to the ‘re-recruitment’ of the project participants included neglectful behavior by staff from public institutions and the NGO. A local official recalled what happened in the following way: I don’t think the NGO planned the activity very well. There were young people who we saw at the beginning, but they were absent in subsequent activities; for this reason there was a serious [lack] of effective outcomes of project aims. Whoever was there at the start of the project should […] have participated until the end of the project. (Local public institution, official 1)

This public official expressed his concerns with the NGO’s (lack of) planning and how the project suddenly became the public institution’s responsibility. The partnership became a source of stress for the other partner, GSIM, and risked failure (Phillpots et al., 2010). This created extra work for GSIM, who had other responsibilities to fulfil outside the project, such as organizing local sport tournaments, licensing for clubs and athletes, and conducting different sport and youth projects (Phillpots et al., 2010). Yet this should not have been an excuse for GSIM to retreat, since it was the main responsible body and funder of the project. Our findings show that GSIM did not provide organizational and technical support, the absence of which impeded both the development of the project and the NGO itself (see also Batley and Mcloughlin [2010] for similar observations). Another reason for the lack

124

S. AÇIKGÖZ ET AL.

of innovation is the mindset of staff. Having staff with different skills who possess high motivation is considered one of the preconditions for enabling social innovation practices (Svensson & Mahoney, 2020). In the project, however, the local public institution and NGO personnel lacked motivation; some representatives of the vocational schools did not want to participate in the meetings and activities, which increased the burden on the rest of the limited staff: At the beginning of this project, we had a coordination problem. Specifically, GSIM should have fully integrated into this project. For example, it helped the organization but was not really effective – we were barely bringing them to the meetings…. Every time a different trainer or local coordinator came to the meeting, so we had to start explaining everything again. (Local public institution, official 3)

Having weak partner relations hinders development of human resources for the project. The staff’s lack of motivation prevented them from forming alliances and developing intergroup contacts, which were crucial for daily operations and the effectiveness of the project (Brake & Misener, 2020). The challenges of including the staff also hindered the involvement of the participants in the project. A lack of communication amongst the partners led to the exclusion of some of the participants. In the following, the main coordinator of GSIM reflects on this problematic relationship: Despite the official letter we sent through the governorship, the principal of one of the vocational schools called me in the morning and said that the letter had not been not received, so he was not going to send students from his school, reportedly 5-6 busloads of children. (Local public institution, official 2)

The relationship between the organizations produced apathy towards the project. Even for important tasks, coordination was lacking and relied heavily on a few project staff members. Moreover, the concerns of the coordinators reflected the pressure put on them by high-profile officials (e.g. the Deputy Minister of Youth and Sport, the General Director of Youth Services and Sport) who were expected to attend the project’s main event. Thus, the number of participants became substantially important for particular events:

7

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND CHALLENGES IN YOUTH-BASED …

125

The department chief, the counsellor and the deputy minister were going to come, and a low turnout of participants would have displeased the senior executive, which would not have been a big problem for me but would have been for my superiors. (Local public institution, official 2)

Referring to a similar context, Cleaves (1980) states that as the norms are formed by superiors who often put more emphasis on success, the needs of the participants are at risk of being neglected. Instead of considering the needs and expectations of young participants, the project coordinators were more concerned about executives’ satisfaction. Project staff missed the opportunity to view young people as the end-users and, moreover, involve them in the operation process, which might have helped the implementors avoid or learn from problems and would have enabled greater project success, as young people would speak about their needs and offer alternative solutions. Previous research has highlighted the importance of considering end-users as a step towards developing new practices and ideas, and especially in overcoming challenges in SFD programs (e.g. Joachim et al., 2020; Winand & Hoeber, 2017). It is likely that young people’s input and innovative solutions would have improved project outcomes; however, in our case study, their involvement in the project implementation was completely absent. As a result, problems related to social rights, such as long working hours and a lack of educational opportunities, persisted in project operations. The project became almost an obligatory activity for staff.

Conclusion This study has examined the implementation process of a sport-based project in Turkey, ‘Apprentices Becoming Stars’, conducted with the partnership of a local NGO and a provincial institution of youth and sport, a branch of the Ministry of Youth and Sport (MYS). Despite embracing the models of ‘project’ and ‘partnership’, the program was highly inflexible and adopted a traditional public administration approach in which innovative practices were not embraced. From a project model perspective, the way organizations partnered could be considered innovative. However, this new model did not lead to improvements in the operation of the program, and end-users did not benefit from the ‘project’ model. Asymmetrical power relations between the public institution and the NGO, bureaucratic issues and a lack of motivation in project staff showed that

126

S. AÇIKGÖZ ET AL.

the traditional approach was still dominant; and as a result, organizations were prevented from developing an effective social inclusion program. The partnered organizations also did not seem to prioritize ‘public value’, which negatively affected the experience of young participants lacking social opportunities. An analysis of the project implementation process reveals that activities did not aim for specific outcomes for young people, but rather fulfilled an administrative requirement to create a positive image for MYS. Challenges the project faced reflect how youth participation was downplayed in favor of projecting an image of project success to sport authorities. After analyzing the general project operations, it appears that the project suffered from both a lack of knowledge and organizational capacity on the part of staff. Despite these problems, mainly caused by the NGO, MYS’s selection of this organization and their lack of managerial support in the project’s initial stages show how MYS distanced itself from the project in order to assign all responsibility to the NGO. The local public institution also lacked the necessary knowledge and organization to innovate or to enhance the performance of the NGO. Thus, the partnership also failed to empower the NGO. This organizational incapacity prevented the development of socially innovative tools and ideas for the operation of the program. As presented in the recent sport and social innovation literature, small innovative steps such as design thinking, motivating partners and project staff and locating capable leadership do not require substantial effort; taking such steps could have made this project useful and meaningful for young participants. Additionally, the management paradigm of GSIM did not facilitate new, innovative practices. In our analysis the gender dimension is missing, which is mainly due to the fact that this project did not reach out to girls; as a result, girls were not included in program activities. Although excluded from the project, girls are very much included in often normative and limiting discourses about women and sport participation (Dagkas & Armour, 2013). In under-resourced rural areas of Turkey, the participation of girls and women in mixed-gender settings seems to be ‘a bridge too far’ (see Açıkgöz et al., 2019). It should be acknowledged that gender segregation may actually allow girls to participate more in sport in some parts of Turkey. However, gender segregation can also increase gender inequality within sport programs. For example, it can reproduce the football field as a homo-social environment for boys and men, strengthen the

7

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND CHALLENGES IN YOUTH-BASED …

127

heteronormativity of football and, thus, limit opportunities for the participation of girls who desire to play football or other sports. Considering the gender inequality gap in Turkey (IYF, 2017), gender-mixed sport projects should also be considered that do not hinder girls’ participation. Additionally, these gender-mixed activities should be supported by the presence of female coaches and managers to counteract perceptions of male-dominant Turkish sport organizations (Koca & Öztürk, 2015). The representation of women in sport organizations would increase the participation of girls seeking role models in an unbiased sporting environment (Ekholm, Dahlstedt, & Rönnbäck, 2019). Partnering with well-organized NGOs following emancipative agendas may also help public institutions raise awareness about the importance of gender equality in sport.

Suggestions for Policy and Practice Overall, it seems that structural issues and organizational knowledge may be holding NGOs back and preventing them from operating socially innovative and impactful projects. In Turkey, MYS must allow a diversity of perspectives to improve local organizations at the macro and micro levels. This would also enable new opportunities for developing long-term projects to address, for example, social exclusion and gender inequality. Considering the recent re-establishment of MYS and the policy strategy of implementing ‘projects’ in close cooperation with local NGOs and institutions, these changes could be considered organizationally innovative in themselves. However, it became clear from this study that MYS and its local institutions have to re-consider the implementation of their projects in order to be effective and, in the long run, benefit the targeted populations. Authorities should focus on the development of organizational capacity, for example, through skills-based training for coordinators and local staff or bringing innovative people into organizations, rather than simply provide a small amount of funding to local public institutions and NGOs (Winand & Hoeber, 2017). This is crucial for the implementation process of sport-based projects in Turkey, especially as local organizations in the country (and likely in other regions and countries) have a very limited capacity and time-window for improving and impacting the lives of their targeted groups, regardless of whether these are young people or people with disabilities. In addition to the approaches presented in our study, public institutions can also employ a program theorical approach to conceptualize,

128

S. AÇIKGÖZ ET AL.

develop and evaluate projects (Pawson, 2006; Weiss, 1998). Such an evaluative approach can not only offer guidelines for organizations wanting to develop effective social programs for their target groups but can also be used as a reflective tool during the process of design thinking in the implementation of projects. Public institutions and NGOs can in this way become more precise in their objectives and more aware of developments in every step of their projects through detailed planning and forecasting. A program theory considers many different aspects, including recruitment, project aims, the use of sport, social relationships, social climates and strategic outcomes (e.g. Coalter, 2013). This theory can also help organizations eliminate most of their encountered problems. However, a crucial element is to involve community members and the targeted youth in the design of the project. The Turkish government could also extend its funding opportunities to all NGOs, rather than only support organizations that politically or ideologically resonate with their objectives (Yabanci, 2019). In this way, the government would stand a better chance of creating impactful projects for a variety of groups. A significant number of NGOs in Turkey are already addressing various issues in society, such as sexual violence,1 discrimination2 and gender inequality in sport,3,4 through sport and body movement. These NGOs are running projects that contribute to the democratization of society and address issues that require urgent action. In the case of Turkey, a partnership between MYS and these wellorganized NGOs could provide new opportunities for local and central public sport institutions to improve their knowledge and technical skills, while at the same time executing impactful projects for vulnerable groups. Further, MYS could include small up-and-coming NGOs in order to facilitate knowledge sharing and open new opportunities for NGOs at different organizational levels. Public sport institutions and local NGOs should increase their awareness of socially innovative practices and management models (e.g. ‘new managerialism’) that implicitly contribute to the neoliberal discourse. In doing so, they may avoid impeding on NGOs’ main principles and goals, such as addressing social issues, prioritizing the needs of local people and developing bottom-up approaches (e.g. Hovden, 2015).

7

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND CHALLENGES IN YOUTH-BASED …

129

Notes 1. Association for Struggle Against Sexual Violence. https://cinselsiddetlem ucadele.org/en/. 2. Network of Sport and Body Movement for Vulnerable Groups. https:// bomovu.org/. 3. Women on the Field. https://www.kizlarsahada.com/. 4. Turkish Association of Sports and Physical Activity for Women. https:// www.kasfad.org/.

References Açıkgöz, S., Haudenhuyse, R., & A¸sçı, H. (2019). Social inclusion for whom and towards what end? A critical discourse analysis of youth and sport policies in Turkey. Journal of Youth Studies, 22(3), 330–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 13676261.2018.1506571. Barbuto, J. E., Gottfredson, R. K., & Searle, T. P. (2014). An examination of emotional intelligence as an antecedent of servant leadership. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 21(3), 315–323. Batley, R., & Mcloughlin, C. (2010). Engagement with non-state service providers in fragile states: Reconciling state-building and service delivery. Development Policy Review, 28(2), 131–154. https://doi.org/10.1111/j. 1467-7679.2010.00478.x. Brake, J., & Misener, K. (2020). “It’s a ripple effect”: The role of intergroup contact within an inner-city youth sport for development and peace program. Managing Sport and Leisure, 25(3), 203–219. Braun, V., Clarke, V., & Weate, P. (2016). Using thematic analysis in sport and exercise research. In B. Smith & A. Sparkes (Eds.), Routledge handbook of qualitative research in sport and exercise. Abingdon: Routledge. https://doi. org/10.4324/9781315762012.ch15. Burnett, C. (2015). The ‘uptake’ of a sport-for-development programme in South Africa. Sport, Education and Society, 20(7), 819–837. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/13573322.2013.833505. Cleaves, P. S. (1980). Implementation amidst scarcity and apathy: Political power and policy design. In M. S. Grindle (Ed.), Politics and policy implementation in the third world (2017th ed., pp. 281–303). Princetion, NJ: Princeton Legacy Library. Coalter, F. (2013). ‘There is loads of relationships here’: Developing a programme theory for sport-for-change programmes. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 48(5), 594–612. https://doi.org/10.1177/101269 0212446143.

130

S. AÇIKGÖZ ET AL.

Collins, M. (with Tess Kay). (2014). Sport and social exclusion (2nd ed.). London: Routledge. Dagkas, S., & Armour, K. (Eds.). (2013). Inclusion and exclusion through youth sport. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Ekholm, D., Dahlstedt, M., & Rönnbäck, J. (2019). Problematizing the absent girl: Sport as a means of emancipation and social inclusion. Sport in Society, 22(6), 1043–1061. https://doi.org/10.1080/17430437.2018.1505870. Erturan-Ogut, E. E., & Sahin, M. Y. (2015). Political clientelism in Turkish sports federations. European Sport Management Quarterly, 14(5), 556–566. https://doi.org/10.1080/16184742.2014.950307. Fahlén, J., Eliasson, I., & Wickman, K. (2015). Resisting self-regulation: An analysis of sport policy programme making and implementation in Sweden. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 7 (3), 391–406. https:// doi.org/10.1080/19406940.2014.925954. Goodwin, M., & Grix, J. (2011). Bringing structures back in: The “governance narrative”, the “decentred approach” and “asymmetrical network governance” in the education and sport policy communities. Public Administration, 89(2), 537–556. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2011.01921.x. Grix, J. (2010). The ‘governance debate’ and the study of sport policy. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 2(2), 159–171. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/19406940.2010.488061. Grix, J., & Phillpots, L. (2011). Revisiting the “Governance narrative”: “Asymmetrical network governance” and the deviant case of the sports policy sector. Public Policy and Administration, 26(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0952076710365423. Hartley, J. (2005). Innovation in governance and public services: Past and present. Public Money & Management, 25(1), 27–34. https://doi.org/10. 1111/j.1467-9302.2005.00447. Haudenhuyse, R., Theeboom, M., & Nols, Z. (2013). Sports-based interventions for socially vulnerable youth: Towards well-defined interventions with easyto-follow outcomes? International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 48(4), 471–484. https://doi.org/10.1177/1012690212448002. Hodge, K., & Sharp, L.-A. (2016). Case studies. In B. Smith & A. C. Sparkes (Eds.), Routledge handbook of qualitative research in sport and exercise. Abingdon: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315762012.ch6. Hovden, J. (2015). Assessing the sociology of sport: On sport organizations and neoliberal discourses. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 50(4–5), 472–476. https://doi.org/10.1177/1012690214566645. IYF (International Youth Foundation). (2017). Global Youth Wellbeing Index. Accessed June 6, 2018. https://www.iyfnet.org/sites/default/files/library/ 2017YouthWellbeingIndex.pdf.

7

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND CHALLENGES IN YOUTH-BASED …

131

Joachim, G., Schulenkorf, N., Schlenker, K., & Frawley, S. (2020). Design thinking and sport for development: Enhancing organizational innovation. Managing Sport and Leisure, 25(3), 175–202. Kidd, B. (2008). A new social movement: Sport for development and peace. Sport in Society, 11(4), 370–380. https://doi.org/10.1080/174304308020 19268. Koca, C., & Öztürk, P. (2015). Gendered perceptions about female managers in Turkish sport organizations. European Sport Management Quarterly, 15(3), 381–406. https://doi.org/10.1080/16184742.2015.1040046. Lindsey, I. (2008). Conceptualising sustainability in sports development. Leisure Studies, 27 (3), 279–294. https://doi.org/10.1080/02614360802048886. Lindsey, I. (2017). Governance in sport-for-development: Problems and possibilities of (not) learning from international development. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 52(7), 801–818. https://doi.org/10.1177/101269 0215623460. MYS [Turkish Ministry of Youth and Sport]. (2014). Verilerle Gençlik ve Spor [Youth and sport with data]. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO978110741532 4.004. MYS [Turkish Ministry of Youth and Sports]. (2016). Yıllık Aktivite Raporu [Annual activity reports]. Ankara. MYS [Turkish Ministry of Youth and Sports]. (2018). Gençlik ve Spor Bakanlı˘gı’ndan Gençlik Projelerine 34.6 Milyon TL Destek [34.6 million Turkish Liras support from the Ministry of Youth and Sport to “Youth Projects”]. Retrieved January 21, 2019, from https://www.gsb.gov.tr/Hab erDetaylari/3/145388/genclik-ve-spor-bakanligindan-444-genclik-projesine346-milyon-tl-destek.aspx. Osborne, S. P., Chew, C., & McLaughlin, K. (2008). The once and future pioneers? The innovative capacity of voluntary organisations and the provision of public services: A longitudinal approach. Public Management Review, 10(1), 51–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719030701763187. Pawson, R. (2006). Evidence-based policy: A realist perspective. London: Sage. Phillpots, L., Grix, J., & Quarmby, T. (2010). Centralized grassroots sport policy and ‘new governance’: A case study of County Sports Partnerships in the UK—Unpacking the paradox. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 46(3), 265–281. https://doi.org/10.1177/1012690210378461. Pritchett, L., Woolcock, M., & Andrews, M. (2013). Looking like a state: Techniques of persistent failure in state capability for implementation. Journal of Development Studies, 49(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388. 2012.709614. Rich, K., & Misener, L. (2019). Playing on the periphery: Troubling sport policy, systemic exclusion and the role of sport in rural Canada. Sport in Society, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/17430437.2019.1565387.

132

S. AÇIKGÖZ ET AL.

Ringuet-Riot, C. J., Hahn, A., & James, D. A. (2013). A structured approach for technology innovation in sport. Sports Technology, 6(3), 137–149. https:// doi.org/10.1080/19346182.2013.868468 Sanders, B., Phillips, J., & Vanreusel, B. (2014). Opportunities and challenges facing NGOs using sport as a vehicle for development in post-apartheid South Africa. Sport, Education and Society, 19(6), 789–805. https://doi.org/10. 1080/13573322.2012.711304. Schulenkorf, N. (2013). Sport for development events and social capital building: A critical analysis of experiences from Sri Lanka. Journal of Sport for Development, 1(1), 25–36. Retrieved from https://jsfd.org/. Schulenkorf, N., Sherry, E., & Rowe, K. (2016). Sport for development: An integrated literature review. Journal of Sport Management, 30(1), 22–39. https:// doi.org/10.1123/jsm.2014-0263. Svensson, P. G., & Cohen, A. (2020). Innovation in sport for development and peace. Managing Sport and Leisure, 25(3), 138–145. https://doi.org/10. 1080/23750472.2020.1728068. Svensson, P. G., & Mahoney, T. Q. (2020). Intraorganizational conditions for social innovation in sport for development and peace. Managing Sport and Leisure, 25(3), 220–238. Tınaz, C., Turco, D. M., & Salisbury, P. (2014). Sport policy in Turkey. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 6(3), 533–545. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/19406940.2014.893247. Tjønndal, A. (2017). Sport innovation: Developing a typology. European Journal for Sport and Society, 14(4), 291–310. https://doi.org/10.1080/16138171. 2017.1421504. Tjønndal, A., & Nilssen, M. (2019). Innovative sport and leisure approaches to quality of life in the smart city. World Leisure Journal, 61(3), 228–240. Weiss, C. H. (1998). Evaluation: Methods for studying programs and policies. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Welty Peachey, J., & Burton, L. (2017). Servant leadership in sport for development and peace: A way forward. Quest, 69(1), 125–139. Welty Peachey, J. W., Cohen, A., Shin, N., & Fusaro, B. (2018). Challenges and strategies of building and sustaining inter-organizational partnerships in sport for development and peace. Sport Management Review, 21(2), 160–175. Winand, M., & Hoeber, L. (2017). Innovation capability of non-profit organisations. In V. Ratten & J. Ferreira (Eds.), Sport entrepreneurship (pp. 13–30). Oxon, UK: Routledge. Yabanci, B. (2019). Work for the nation, obey the state, praise the ummah: Turkey’s government-oriented youth organizations in cultivating a new nation. Ethnopolitics, 1–33.

PART III

Innovations that Challenge Definitions of Sport

CHAPTER 8

Social Innovation and Virtual Sport: A Case of Esports in Norway Anne Tjønndal and Mads Skauge

Introduction As the first global sport that is practiced virtually, the emergence of Esports1 represents one of the most radical innovations in sport today. Simply by being a sport that is played virtually, and not physically, it challenges how we define sports. Interestingly, Esports is one of the fastest growing sports globally (Jenny, Manning, Keiper, & Olrich, 2017). For instance, over 20 million people tried to qualify for one of the 32 available places in the 2018 FIFA eWorld Cup (Altibox, 2019). In the same year, Esports reached a global audience of 385 million people (NRK, 2018d), with more than 100 million individuals watching Esports on a weekly basis. The term ‘Esports’ refers to organized competitive

A. Tjønndal · M. Skauge (B) Faculty of Social Sciences, Nord University, Bodø, Norway e-mail: [email protected] A. Tjønndal e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 A. Tjønndal (ed.), Social Innovation in Sport, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63765-1_8

135

136

A. TJØNNDAL AND M. SKAUGE

computer gaming where individuals or teams try to beat their opponent(s) according to the rules of the game (Jonasson & Thiborg, 2010; Llorens, 2017). There are a variety of competitive Esports games and it is common to make a distinction between three main categories of Esports: (1) shooters and survival games (e.g. Counter Strike and Fortnite), (2) strategy games (for instance Star Craft and League of Legends) and (3) sports simulators (such as FIFA, NBA, NHL). These new virtual sports have taken the international sportscape by storm, so much so that The International Olympic Committee (IOC) is considering the inclusion of (sports simulating) Esports in the Olympic Games. As a first step, it is announced that Esports will be organized alongside the sporting competitions at the Olympic Games in Paris in 2024 (IOC, 2018; Morgan, 2019). This promise of including Esports in the Olympics is part of IOC’s ongoing agenda to make the Olympic Games more ‘youth-friendly’. The Paris 2024 hosts have also expressed interest in the possibility of adding Esports to the Olympic programme, stating that ‘the youth are interested, let’s meet them’ (BBC, 2017). While IOC are positive, the thought of counting Esports as ‘real sport’ is met with substantial resistance from some scholars, sports leaders, athletes and sport fans (Parry, 2019; The Conversation, 2018). The policies towards including or excluding Esports in sport organizations also vary from country to country (Tassi, 2013; Witkowski, 2012; Rayat, 2017). While Esports is not yet included in the Norwegian Olympic and Paralympic Committee and Confederation of Sports (NOC), these virtual sports have expanded greatly in Norway during the last three years (NRK, 2019b, 2019d). In this timeframe, secondary schools have started to include Esports in their sport programmes (Bydelsnytt, 2018; NRK, 2018c), the Norwegian Football Federation (NFF) released a professional national FIFA league (eSerien) (Eserien, 2019), and some local sports clubs have started their own Esports teams (e.g. Driv sports club, 2019; Konnerud sports club, 2018). Although as yet there is limited empirical research on Esports participation in Norway, some studies suggest that young people spend an increasing amount of their leisure time playing computer games (Bakken, 2018). A recent study indicates that 96% of Norwegian boys and 63% of girls aged 9–18 years, play videogames (Children and the Media Survey, 2018), which is almost twice the proportion of youth regularly involved in more traditional organized sports (Bakken, 2019). Additionally, 60% of those Norwegian youths playing videogames are doing so every day

8

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND VIRTUAL SPORT: A CASE …

137

(Children and the Media Survey, 2018). Arguably, the popularity in video gaming alone, points to a development where Esports has become such a radical innovation that cannot be ignored in the Norwegian sports context. We suspect that is also the case in many other countries. Against this background, our aim here is to explore the innovation that the expansion of Esports in Norway represents, and to explore if these new virtual sports have potential to meet social needs that traditional sports cannot. Specifically, we study three central aspects that have influenced the growth of Esports in Norway: (1) the introduction of NFF’s FIFA league—eSerien, (2) the inclusion of Esports in secondary school sports programmes, and (3) the emergence of Esports teams in organized sports clubs. By investigating these three aspects of the Esports development in Norway, we discuss how they might challenge definitions of sport and how they might change the traditional Norwegian sports model. In this way, our analysis of Norwegian Esports is a modest contribution to international research literature on social innovation in sport by exploring the socially innovative potential of virtual sports. In the following, we first of all describe the context of our study. We then provide a brief overview of the current research on Esports, and describe our methods and materials before analysing three of the most central aspects of the expansion of Esports in Norway today. Finally, our chapter ends with some concluding reflections on the socially innovative potential of Esports.

The Norwegian Sports Model Organized sport in Norway is gathered under the umbrella organization—the NOC. At the local grass-roots level, sport is organized by voluntary sports clubs, of which there are around 11,000 across the country. NOC has approximately 2,100,000 members, making it the largest volunteer organization in the country. The organizational structure of NOC is based on a two-tier system: One tier with 17 regional sports confederations, and the other with 54 national sport federations (NOC, 2019). The day-to-day operations of the sports clubs largely depends on voluntary work undertaken by members of the local community (Seippel & Skille, 2019). Many Norwegians regard participation in (youth) sport as an extension of family life, and an arena for community and common experiences between children and parents (Archetti, 2003). Introducing your children

138

A. TJØNNDAL AND M. SKAUGE

to organized sport at an early age is often perceived as a “natural” part of good parenting (Stefansen, Smette, & Strandbu, 2018) and parents often function as coaches or take on administrative roles in local sports clubs (Seippel & Skille, 2019). When it comes to youth sport, about 93% of Norwegian teenagers have at some point in their childhood been members of a sports club. About half of the youth population (13– 18 years) are still active in organized sport, thereby making club sport the most popular organized leisure activity for children and youth (Bakken, 2019). The most popular youth sports are football, handball and skiing. There is no strong link between the school system and the sports clubs, which means that participation in sport take place during leisure time in the afternoons and evenings. However, as the catchment area of sports clubs is mostly the local community, young people often participate in the same clubs as their peers from school (Strandbu, Bakken, & Sletten, 2017). What may distinguish Norwegian sport from that in other western countries, is that there is a close relationship between organized sport and the state. The Ministry of Culture is the main financial benefactor of NOC. State funding of NOC is deeply rooted in a sport-health ideology that legitimizes sport through the belief that participation has physical and mental health benefits (Whitepaper 26, 2012). NOC is thus assigned a public health mission, while at the same time sport is understood as something far more than physical (competitive) activity.

Previous Research on Esports Although the practice of Esports is gaining popularity, as a research field it is still in its infancy. The question of whether Esports qualifies as sport, has been thoroughly discussed in academic journals. Many scholars (e.g. Funk, Pizzo, & Baker, 2018; Jenny et al., 2017; Jonasson & Thiborg, 2010; Thiel & John, 2019; Witkowski, 2012) seem to agree that Esports shares enough characteristics with modern sports to be considered ‘real sport’. Others argue that Esports does not fit under the sport definitions (Drewe, 2003; Hallmann & Giel, 2018; Parry, 2019). Heere (2018) argues that regardless of whether Esports qualifies as a sport, it should be examined by sports scholars because it is a leisure activity that is gradually gaining the characteristics of modern organized sport. Esports mega-events, such as Campzone and the World Cyber Games (WCG), have been studied (Janz & Martens, 2005). Hutchins (2008)

8

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND VIRTUAL SPORT: A CASE …

139

argues that competitions like WCG have several similarities with mega sport events in that there are medal tables, national teams, opening and closing ceremonies, a cross-continental torch relay, a players’ village and a host city selection process. In their study, Janz and Martens (2005) find that the participants in the Campzone LAN event are motivated by social contact and a need to know more about games. This is in line with other findings of the social element of gaming as the main factor for youths engaged in Esports (Bjørner, 2014). Other studies explore the motivational factors affecting the time spent on Esports, revealing that interest in competition and skills development is also vital for Esports participants (Lee & Schoenstedt, 2011). Conway (2010) argues that engaging in Esports can enrich cultural capital and strengthen social relations through self-actualization and self-conception. Trepte, Reinecke, and Juechems (2012, p. 833) state that ‘online gaming may result in strong social ties, if gamers engage in online activities that continue beyond the game and extend these with offline activities ’. According to Martoncik (2015), these social ties can satisfy the need to belong by creating friendly relationships through membership of a clan. Bjørner’s (2014) study of Esports athletes reveals that they have embodied dispositions in common (group habitus), consisting of joint beliefs, morals, values and ways of practising Esports. In this study, players and family members describe the continuous negotiations in everyday life about the players’ structure of time and space for the highly timeconsuming leisure activity of Esports; an activity that family and friends link to negative qualities such as laziness, unhealthiness and asociality. However, there is little empirical evidence to suggest that time spent on gaming leads to poorer social competence (Hygen et al., 2019) or to more aggressive behaviour and less empathy (Ferguson & Wang, 2019; Kühn et al., 2018). Some studies have highlighted gender differences finding that Esports is an overwhelmingly male dominated domain (Bertozzi, 2008). Several studies show that ‘girl gamers’ are stigmatized and often sexualized by male participants (Arneberg & Hegna, 2018; Taylor, Jenson, & Castell, 2009). These findings indicate that Esports faces some of the same ethical challenges as traditional sports in terms of gender equality issues such as sexual harassment and unequal opportunities for male and female athletes. Finally, some sport management studies emphasize the institutionalization and professionalization processes of Esports. Xu (2012), for instance, discusses how the inclusion of Esports in the National Sports

140

A. TJØNNDAL AND M. SKAUGE

Council of China played a significant role in the development of the Esports club management system, the competition system, and the cultivation of athletes and market operations. In the following, we describe our methodological approach to studying the emergence of Esports in Norway.

Data and Methods: A Netnographic Approach Kozinets (2002, p. 62) describes netnography as ‘a new qualitative research methodology that adapts ethnographic research techniques to study cultures and communities that are emerging through computer-mediated communications ’. As Esports represents a more-than-human world where people come together through digital technologies, netnography is a fruitful research strategy for investigating our research question. Langer and Beckman (2005) describe four central methodological stages for netnographic studies: (1) the formulation of research questions and identification of appropriate online fora for study, (2) data collection through direct copy from computer-mediated communications and observations of virtual interactions between individuals, (3) coding and analysis, and (4) presentations of final findings to people who have been studied (online) in order to solicit their comments. As Kozinets (2002, p. 64) states, netnography is ‘based primarily on the observation of textual discourse’. According to Langer and Beckman (2005), a qualitative content analysis strategy is often applied in netnographic approaches. Our data consists of digital media texts discussing Esports in the Norwegian context published between January 2016 and June 2019, in national and regional media outlets. In this case, we utilize Bratberg’s (2017) understanding of the term ‘text’, which includes content published in formats such as videos and podcasts. This search strategy yielded a sample consisting of 92 texts discussing various themes related to Esports in Norway. In our material there are 86 texts (online articles, opinion pieces, political pieces and forum posts) and 6 videos/podcasts. An overview of our sample, chronologically categorized by publication date, is provided in Table 8.1. References to all texts included in our sample can be found in Appendix I. Using an inductive approach to analyze our material, we identify several influential sub-themes shaping the rapid development of Esports in Norway. Three of the most prominent themes are: (1) the inclusion of Esports in Norwegian secondary school programmes, (2) the debut

Published 8th January (2016a) 11th January (2016b) 23rd July (2016) 26th August (2016c) 12th September (2016d) 18th January (2017) 12th April (2017) 31st May (2017) 25th October (2017) 6th December (2017) 10th December (2017) 11th December (2017) 9th January (2018) 17th February (2018a)

Gamer

Gamer

NRK

Gamer

Gamer Gamer

Romsdals Budstikke

Gausdal secondary school

VG NRK

Medier24

Eurosport

Bydelsnytt

Adresseavisen

Sample of texts

Source

Table 8.1

Opinion piece

Online article

Online article

Online article

Online article Online article

Online article

Online article

Online article Online article

Online article

Online article

Online article

Online article

Text type

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND VIRTUAL SPORT: A CASE …

(continued)

Norway’s first secondary school to include Esport in their sports programme Esport clubs supports the inclusion of Esport in secondary school sports programmes Norwegian Esport coach employed in prestigious Esport organization This is the new Esport programme at Garnes secondary school Esport athlete wants to be a role model for girls Sports club in Drammen gets financial support for including Esport Record number of girl participants and big cash prices in Norwegian Esport competition Esport to be included at Gausdal secondary school’s sports programme Norway’s unofficial Esport queen NRK explains the reason why they broadcast the CS:Go-final It is a mystery that no more Norwegian TV channels involve in Esport When do we see Norwegian Olympic Esport participants? Esport in the sports programme of Tiller secondary school Lazy, overweight nerds will be the next Olympic heroes

Content

8

141

5th March (2018a)

30th March (2018a) 12th April (2018b) 20th April (2018) 27th 27th 27th 27th 23rd May (2018) 20th August (2018c) 21st August (2018) 21st August (2018b) 23rd August (2018b) 31st August (2018h) 5th September (2018d)

Gamer

NRK

NRK Gudbrandsdølen Dagningen

Aftenposten Dagbladet Norskespilleautomater NRK

Telenor Adresseavisen Venstre

VG Gamer

NRK NRK

(2018) (2018) (2018) (2018c)

19th February (2018a) 1st March (2018b)

VG Adresseavisen

April April April April

Published

(continued)

Source

Table 8.1

article article article article

Online article Online article

Online article Video

Online article Opinion piece Political debate piece

Online Online Online Online

Video Online article

Online article

Opinion piece

Online article Opinion piece

Text type

IOC opens for Esport as Olympic sport Esport: a gender inclusive sport without organized doping We can help the development and professionalization of Esport in Norway if we show political will Tips for parents who have children involved in gaming Politician call for Esport to become part of NOC Discussing gender differences in Esport. Esport should be for everyone NOC is positive about the inclusion of Esport NOC to collaborate with Esport NOC should recognize Esport Folk high school offers Esport. However, only one girl participates Esport: play, game or sport? Norway should accept Esport Political party claims Esport as the sport of the future These girls are passionate gamers The Minister of Culture’s speech at the national Esport day Big cash prize in Norwegian Fortnite tournament Esport to become bigger than cross-country skiing. Norwegian headhunted by Swiss Esports team asks Norway to take Esport more seriously

Content

142 A. TJØNNDAL AND M. SKAUGE

Published 6th September (2018e) 9th September (2018f) 11th September (2018) 27th September (2018)

28th September (2018g) 29th September (2018)

26th October (2018) 5th November (2018) 15th November (2018) 16th November (2018) 22nd November (2018) 23rd November (2018) 16th December (2018) 18th December (2018c) 18th December (2018d) 20th December (2018)

Source

NRK

NRK NRK Beta Barnevakten

NRK

Pressfire

Kondis Vagsbygd secondary school

Medier24

Konnerud sports club

Avisa Nordland Altaposten Soundcloud VG VG

NTB

Online article

Opinion piece Online article Podcast Online article Online article

Online article

Online article

Opinion piece Online article

Opinion piece

Online article

Online article Opinion piece Online article

Online article

Text type

(continued)

NFF and the Norwegian Ice Hockey Association welcome Esports Parents should support youth to engage in Esport Why people watch Esport The best Esport athletes are in good physical condition. High performance Esport requires an ascetic and health-oriented lifestyle The Norwegian Media Authority is sceptical of big cash prices in Fortnite tournament The Norwegian Media Authority criticize big money prices in Esport children’s competitions. But the arguments are weak Esport to become a part of organized sports? Esport into the sports programme of Vågsbygd secondary school Big Norwegian newspaper wants to bring Esport to the people, as was the case for chess in Norway Konnerud sports club includes Esport in their activities Esport: sports or play? First Sami school to approve Esport NFF’s Esport involvement NFF into a new era Can gaming get youth off the couch? Why NOC wants Esport NOC faces ethical questions regarding Esport

Content

8 SOCIAL INNOVATION AND VIRTUAL SPORT: A CASE …

143

23rd 11th 27th 28th 29th January (2019)

1th February (2019) 3rd February (2019a) 7th February (2019c) 8th February (2019a) 8th February (2019) 13th February (2019) 1st March (2019b) 1st March (2019) 2nd March (2019d) 6th March (2019)

6th March (2019)

VG Pengespill NRK NRK

Sosialnytt

Journalisten

VG

NRK

Adresseavisen Ranheim football

Fredrikstad Blad Adresseavisen Fjordenes Tidende NRK Eliteserien

Eserien

December (2018e) January (2019) January (2019a) January (2019b)

Published

(continued)

Source

Table 8.1

Online article

Online article Opinion piece Online article Video Online article

Online article Online article

Online article

Opinion piece

Online article

Online article

Online article Online article Video Opinion piece

Text type

NOC president wants Esport included Investor pays Norway’s best Esport team On virtual friendships: the story of Mats How was the computer match? The parental perspective The story of Mats make people all over the world rethink their views of computer games and friendships The journalist of the Mats’ story talks about how the story has changed her life The story of Mats is one of the most important stories of our time The World of Warcraft-community wants Mats to become a virtual figure in the game The social aspects of Esport News article on the first two professional Esport players to sign contracts with Ranheim football Political party supports Esport We can learn from the story of Mats Esports becomes part of local sports club Dvergsnes sports club includes Esport for youth TV channel and Norwegian top football launches eFootball league. Norsk Tipping (betting company assigned by the government) is open for bets on Esport Information about the first official Norwegian Esport league in FIFA19

Content

144 A. TJØNNDAL AND M. SKAUGE

Published 6th March (2019b) 6th March (2019) 15th March (2019) 17th March (2019) 19th March (2019) 22nd March (2019e)

3rd April (2019) 5th April (2019) 9th April (2019) 9th April (2019a) 9th April (2019) 10th April (2019) 12th April(2019) 17th April (2019)

23rd April (2019f)

Source

VG

Sunnmørsposten

Brann football

Dagens Næringsliv

Vesteraalens Avis NRK

Nettavisen

SpareBank1 Altibox Eurosport Komplett Idrettspolitikk Driv sports club

Sotahjornet

NRK

Online article

Forum post

Online article Online article Video Online article Opinion piece Online article

Online article

Online article Online article

Online article

Online article

Online article

Online article

Text type

(continued)

18 football clubs included in NFF’s eFootball league (eSerien) eFootball league starts this spring. The Norwegian elite clubs are excited This is Esport. Discussing Brann football club’s Esport involvement Esport becomes part of secondary school sports programme Parental involvement in Esport Sports club wants to learn more about Esport for youth. Diet, physical activity and sleep are important 14-year-old has earned 1,7 million NOK on Esport SpareBank1 becomes main partner of eSerien Everything set for eSerien Summary of the first FIFA game of eSerien Esport as ‘real’ sport Is Norway well prepared for Esport? Driv sports club hosts Norway’s first organized Esport tournament Supporters discussing whether Vålerenga football should promote Esport as gaming is linked to obesity Study kills myth about children and gaming

Content

8 SOCIAL INNOVATION AND VIRTUAL SPORT: A CASE …

145

Published 26th April (2019a) 5th May (2019) 9th May (2019) 10th May (2019)

10th May (2019) 16th May (2019a) 22nd May (2019b) 26th May (2019b) 27th May (2019a) 6th June (2019) 14th June (2019) 19th June (2019b) 25th June (2019c) 28th June (2019b)

Gamer

Klemetsrud sports club Aftenposten

Kampanje

Bergens Tidende

Josimar Eurosport

Gamer NFF Frogner sports club

Lier sports club Josimar Gamer

NFF

(continued)

Source

Table 8.1

Online article

Online article Opinion piece Online article

Online article Online article Online article

Opinion piece Online article

Opinion piece

Online article

Online article Online article

Online article

Text type

Norwegian political party establishes a gaming policy. Gaming is culture, industry and learning Klemetsrud sports club starts new Esport division Norwegian elite football clubs discussing whether to take part in eFootball and eSerien Boss of Discovery TV predicts Esport as the greatest popular cultural revolution since the Beatles Why NFF and football clubs should not go into Esport and increase children’s screen time Esport is not sport Experts’ verdict on eSerien: This club will be champions Vålerenga wins the first season of eSerien Selection for the national eFootball team Frogner sports club is looking to hire Esport coach Lier sports club releases Esport team Esport could be considered ‘real’ sport Political party will work for better institutionalization of Esport in Norway International seminar in Norway discusses the future of eFootball

Content

146 A. TJØNNDAL AND M. SKAUGE

8

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND VIRTUAL SPORT: A CASE …

147

season of NFFs FIFA league—eSerien, and (3) the inclusion of Esports in local sport clubs. Our analysis is divided into three parts according to these three sub-themes. The quotes from the material used in the analysis have been translated from Norwegian to English.

Resistance, Professionalization and Partial Inclusion? The growth of Esports challenges Norwegians to reflect on whether physical activity of moderate to high intensity is a defining feature of sport or not. The emphasis on physical prowess as a defining attribute of sport is nothing new. Arguments about physical skills have previously led to debates about whether activities such as chess, motocross and archery are ‘real sports’ (Parry, 2019). We also find arguments of physical (in)activity in several of the texts in our material (e.g. Gamer, 2016a, 2016b, 2016c; NRK, 2018d, 2019e). Esports are, at least in most cases, not very physically demanding. Therefore, playing Esports does not itself lead to a physically active lifestyle, and the health benefits that many associate with playing sports. In our chapter we wish to move beyond the debate of whether Esports ‘fit’ within the definition of sport or not, because this debate centres around the question of physicality as a defining feature of sport. Therefore, we focus on three other features of the emergence of Esports in Norway, and we have structured our analysis accordingly. These three themes are: (1) Esports partial inclusion in organized sport, (2) the introduction of Esports in secondary school programmes, and (3) the national professional FIFA league (eSerien). The Inclusiveness of Esports and Its Partial Inclusion in Organized Sport Health encompasses much more than physical activity. Well-being, a sense of belonging, social integration and happiness are equally important for an individual’s health. The relationship between Esports, well-being and mental health is underexplored in Norway, but some international studies have illustrated how playing Esports can have mental health benefits, for example by releasing stress and creating digital friendships and virtual places of belonging (Martoncik, 2015). If we look at aspects outside physical activity, many of the health-related arguments for the financial support of Norwegian organized sports are likely to be found in both the virtual

148

A. TJØNNDAL AND M. SKAUGE

world of Esports and traditional, physical sports. For instance, it is easy to imagine that Esports could contribute to social inclusion in the same kind of way that youth might experience through participation in other sports. In some cases, Esports may be more socially inclusive than traditional sports; something that is exemplified in our material by the story of Mats ‘Ibelin’ Steen (NRK, 2019a). Mats was a young Norwegian man who had spent most of his life in a wheelchair. Born with a muscle disorder that drastically reduced his lifespan, he died suddenly from his disease at the age of 25. While Mats was alive, his parents were worried about him and what they viewed as a lonely life mostly spent playing computer games alone in his room. However, for Mats it meant a place where he could escape his disability, which he expressed frequently in his blog: ‘In there my handicap doesn’t matter, my chains are broken and I can be whoever I want to be. In there I feel normal ’ (Musingslif, 2013). When Mats died and his virtual friends from all over the world—whom his parents had never met—travelled to attend the funeral, his parents discovered that his gaming had given him close friends and a sense of belonging with peers in a way that was difficult for him to attain in the ‘real’ world. In an interview Mats’ father explained: ‘Our view of friendship was very traditional. His friends, who he only met virtually, we did not really see them as true friends ’ NRK (2019b). While Mats was alive, his parents were unaware of the extent of their son’s virtual life. It was only after his death, when Mats’ virtual friends all over the world lit candles for him, that his parents realized the importance of gaming for Mats’ mental health and quality of life (BBC, 2019). Mats’ story made many Norwegians rethink their view of computer games and friendships (Adresseavisen, 2019b; Journalisten, 2019; Sosialnytt, 2019) and has been described in national media as ‘one of the most important story of our time, helping us to understand the enormous positive value gaming might have for young people’ (VG, 2019a). Engaging in Esports does not magically create new friendships or social ties in the way that Mats’ story exemplifies, but research has shown that gaming can be an important part of young people’s social belonging (Eklund & Roman, 2018). Taking into account the potential of Esports to promote mental health, which is one of the health benefits of sport participation advocated in the Norwegian sports model legitimating its financial support over the national state budget (Whitepaper 26, 2012), there is little reason to exclude Esports from NOC. Mats’ story also

8

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND VIRTUAL SPORT: A CASE …

149

illustrates how Esports provides an opportunity for sport organizations to include children and youth who are not easily engaged in traditional sport. This is also one of the main arguments put forward by local sports clubs that have already included Esports in their activities: We want to reach out to youth who are not already active in sport and create a safe and nurturing local community that is good for all types of children to grow up in. We know that many kids sit at home gaming by themselves. We want to make it possible for them to come here and experience belonging and all the other great aspects that being part of a sports club can offer. (Leader of local sports club, quoted in Gamer, 2017)

Even though Esports is not an official part of NOC, an increasing number of sports clubs have already included Esports in their repertoire, thus demonstrating that although there is substantial resistance towards recognizing these virtual sports as ‘real sport’ (e.g. Josimar, 2019a), there is also acceptance and support: There are great similarities between Esports teams and football teams, it’s about team building and collaboration. Including Esports in sports clubs can help structure Esports participation and promote a healthy lifestyle and good attitudes (…). They can’t just do whatever they want to because they are Esports athletes. They have to adhere to club rules and behave well, if not they can’t represent our club. (Leader of local sports club, quoted in Gamer, 2017) This is sports. The players are athletes. They have to be registered members of the sports club and like all other sports, they have to obey the fair play rules and the no-drugs policy. (Klemetsrud sports club, 2019) Another dimension is mental health. It’s just as important as physical health. If Esports is organized in sports clubs, youth will have a community; a local sense of belonging with others. They can be part of something bigger than themselves, something that’s very important for all of us. Instead of playing on their own, alone in their parents’ basement, they get out of the house, join a local community of peers and socialize with others. (County sport leader, quoted in Gamer, 2017)

Although NOC has not yet included Esports as an official part of Norwegian organized sport, several of the local sports clubs that have started Esports teams express an understanding of Esports as a phenomenon with

150

A. TJØNNDAL AND M. SKAUGE

many similarities to analogue/physical sport, and as an opportunity to include groups of people, such as youth with physical disabilities, who are marginalized from sport participation today. Esports in Secondary School Sport Programmes The first Norwegian secondary school to include Esports in its sport programme was Garnes, located to the north-east of Bergen. Garnes held its first Esports classes in 2016. Norway’s first class of Esports students had five hours of gaming on their weekly school schedules, the same number of training hours as students in the football and handball programmes (Gamer, 2016a). The new Esports students were also subjected to an Esports exam, with grades that appeared on the secondary school diploma. In an interview, Sindre Rygg, the first teacher to be hired for the subject of Esports at a Norwegian secondary school, stated that his motivation for accepting the job was to change the social stigma associated with gaming: I want to oppose the prejudices towards gaming and Esports. It’s important to show people that just because you are a gamer, it doesn’t mean that you are asocial, have a bad diet, live your life in isolation and sleep too little. You interact with other people a lot during gaming, and you develop meaningful relationships with the people you play with. That’s very healthy, especially for teenagers. (Rygg quoted in Gamer, 2016c)

The material also demonstrates how Esports is closely modelled after traditional sports in secondary school sports programmes. The learning objectives of the new Esports subject are fashioned after these traditional sports courses. As Rygg states in his interview with Gamer: ‘The learning objectives of other sports programmes at the school deeply influence how we evaluate and grade the Esports students ’. This seems to be the case for all the Norwegian secondary schools that have included Esports in their sport programmes. This is illustrated by a quote from an interview with Jo Hjermstad, leader of the elite sport programmes at Gausdal secondary school: ‘One of our learning objectives for the Esports subject is that students should learn to act as elite athletes, something that is not compatible with staying up all night drinking Coca Cola’ (Hjermstad in Gausdal secondary school, 2017). Another secondary school, Vagsbygd (2018), describes its Esports programme like this:

8

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND VIRTUAL SPORT: A CASE …

151

Esport is a five hour weekly subject, just like any other elite sport subject at our school, such as football or golf. And we grade the students just like any other school subject. In our learning objectives for Esports, we have three main topics: training planning, general physical conditioning and sport specific skill development. As an elite athlete, it’s important that the students learn what is necessary to perform at an elite level. To achieve great performance, a healthy lifestyle is a must.

The texts discussing the inclusion of Esports in secondary school sports, indicate that Esports are subjected to, what Guttmann terms as a ‘sportification’ process, similar to other youth-oriented activities that IOC has shown an interest in. Surfing, skateboarding and snowboarding have all followed similar development trajectories after IOC has shown interest in including them in the Olympic Games, with the intention of becoming more attractive to youth (Tjønndal, Hjelseth, & Lenneis, 2019). This also means that Esports gamers are being treated as youth elite athletes in these schools, a parallel the teachers who are responsible for the Esports subjects are keen to draw: If you want to succeed and become a great Esports athlete, you need to practise coordination, reaction, speed of action and the ability to concentrate over long periods of time. Just as in any other elite sport, knowledge about nutrition, rest and recovery is important. (Hjermstad in Gausdal secondary school, 2017) When I coach my students, I focus on nutrition and establishing good sleeping habits so that the students can perform to the best of their abilities when they compete. (Rygg in Gamer, 2016c)

The above quotes from the material demonstrate how the advocates of Esports frequently draw parallels between elite athletes in analogue sport and the gamers who are now characterized as ‘virtual athletes’ (Jenny et al., 2017). Again, these arguments are similar to those of the sports club leaders who have chosen to include Esports in their organization, such as Klemetsrud and Driv sports club (Driv sports club, 2019; Klemetsrud sports club, 2019).

152

A. TJØNNDAL AND M. SKAUGE

NFF’s eSerien: Professionalization and Dilemmas NFF has come the furthest of the national sport federations in terms of including Esports in their organization. In 2018, Norway’s eFootball national team was founded and the first virtual international match in NFF’s history was played (VG, 2018c). NFF claims that Norway is a leading country in eFootball, participating in both the FIFA eNations Cup and hosting international eFootball conferences (NFF, 2019b). In the spring of 2019, a year after the establishment of the national eFootball team, eSerien was founded (Altibox, 2019). eSerien is NFF’s national FIFA19 league and is organized through a collaboration between NFF, Discovery TV and the Esports company Good Game (NFF, 2019b). Each participating club has two players, each wearing the official kit of the virtual edition of the club they represent. The league starts with group games, where the two best in each group move on to the playoffs. The prize pool is 250,000 NOK and victory also gives 200 so-called ‘Global Series Points’ for the FIFA eWorld Cup qualification. All the Norwegian football clubs from the two top divisions are invited to participate. In the first season, 18 clubs (with a total of 36 professional FIFA players) took part. NFF has stated that more teams and players will participate for the second season in 2020/2021 (VG, 2019b). In this way, eSerien is the most professionalized form of competitive sports simulating Esports in Norway, with enough sponsors to sustain professional virtual athletes in a national league. So, what arguments are given for involvement in eSerien from the sponsors, NFF and the elite football clubs taking part? The brand and communication manager of Altibox (the main sponsor of eSerien), Aleksander Eikeberg, believes that eFootball has a great potential to reach new audiences who are not interested in traditional football: ‘It’s an exciting way to reach a wider football audience’ (Altibox, 2019). Another main sponsor of eSerien, argues that ‘the commitment and passion that emerges within Esports engages a group that has so far not been so visible. Here, we can promote a whole new generation of talents in a new field’ (SpareBank1, 2019). NFF’s Esports manager, Mats Theie Bretvik, and NFF’s director of communication and society, Svein Graff, argue that NFF also sees Esports as an opportunity to activate new groups. As a result of the Esports development, there are now more ways to consume football and it is in NFF’s interest to get involved in them all: ‘Football has traditionally been

8

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND VIRTUAL SPORT: A CASE …

153

consumed by either playing, being a supporter or through stadium audience. eFootball brings a fourth element: Participation through Esports ’ (VG, 2018d). Furthermore, they point out that there does not have to be any contradiction between playing eFootball and being physically active: ‘The best Esports players are interested in football, both in terms of consuming and physical involvement ’ (Bretvik, quoted in Soundcloud, 2018). During an NFF FIFA tournament with 64 participants, two out of three participants reported playing football on average five hours a week (VG, 2018d). Hence, NFF is convinced that eFootball reinforces the general football interest in Norway (Soundcloud, 2018). Finally, eFootball and traditional football have a lot in common, and NFF claims that both versions can contribute to skill development and health: We see a clear connection between mastering football and mastering eFootball. Within Esports, many of the same mechanisms apply as in traditional sports. The concentration level must be high and one must therefore eat healthily, get enough sleep and be in good physical shape to perform at a high level. Here, NFF has knowledge that Esports athletes can benefit from. In this way, NFF can inspire even more people to adopt healthy lifestyles. (VG, 2018d)

In light of the newly established eSerien, it is relevant to ask whether there are similarities between eFootball and traditional elite football. At the top level, such as the eSerien, Esports is characterized by an evident professionalization that reflects that of traditional elite sports. As in traditional elite sports, the prelude to the matches in eSerien include betting tips, promo shots, expert analysis and interviews with athletes (Eurosport, 2019b). The players are scouted, picked, hired and paid. Therefore, those who participate in eSerien are the best FIFA players in Norway, thus making it a prestigious tournament and a recruitment arena for the eFootball national team (NFF, 2019a). Players are even treated as top athletes when it comes to the facilities that are provided (paid coaches, exercise facilities, etc.) (Ranheim football, 2019). As in the real world of elite football, there is a transfer window where virtual athletes can be bought and sold from one club to another (Eurosport, 2019b). There are also some ongoing professionalization processes regarding the broadcasting of eSerien. Today, eSerien can be watched online at no cost, as well as live on the TV channel Eurosport Norway. The matches are commented

154

A. TJØNNDAL AND M. SKAUGE

by professional commentators and the playoffs are played in real football stadiums with spectators present (VG, 2019b). It is likely that eSerien and eFootball in general will continue to expand in Norway in the coming years. However, with the introduction of eFootball and its inclusion in NFF, several dilemmas emerge. How will NFF combine the task of organizing traditional football with eFootball? It is possible that these two practices (‘real’ football and eFootball) will come into conflict, e.g. if children and youth drop out of organized football at a young age to take part in club sport organized eFootball. What challenges such a scenario would entail for NFF, is uncertain. Another potential issue for NFF is the institutionalization and organization of Norwegian eFootball in general. While NFF has the monopoly on organized ‘real’ football in Norway, it does not have the same monopoly for eFootball. If a major Esports company, such as EA Sports, decides to launch a national FIFA league, it might become more attractive for players than NFF’s eSerien. Additionally, NFF has no national Esports federation to support them in such commercial battles (Josimar, 2019b). Thus, the future of the newly established eSerien is far from certain.

Final Remarks: Esports---A Social Innovation in Sport? The emergence of Esports represents a radical innovation in that these new virtually played sports challenge both our definitions and understandings of contemporary sport. This is most visible through ongoing academic discussions of whether Esports qualifies as ‘real sport’ or not (Funk et al., 2018; Parry, 2019; Thiel & John, 2019). Regardless of whether we think that Esports qualifies as sport, the material illustrates a tendency of Esports gradually becoming more integrated into the national Norwegian sports model. Internationally, many countries have already included Esports in their organized sports models (Witkowski, 2012), in addition to the fact that IOC seems positive about including Esports in the Olympic Games (Morgan, 2019). Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that Esports could become an integrated part of the Olympic programme in the near future. Thus, at the moment it seems inevitable that Esports will become increasingly recognized and organized as competitive sport. Without innovation in digital technology, Esports would not have been possible. In this way, innovation is at heart of Esports. Even if the

8

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND VIRTUAL SPORT: A CASE …

155

ways Esports challenges our definitions of sport is a clear example of an radical innovation in sport, this alone is not enough to consider it as social innovation. As other essays in this anthology have discussed, social innovation differ from other theoretical perspectives on innovation (Mulgan, 2012). Innovation is often described as novel ideas and inventions that bring added value and financial gain for businesses and organizations (McKeown, 2008). As the introduction of eSerien illustrates, the potential for commercial gain through professional Esports is already recognized by NFF and its sponsors. Still, our analysis of Esports in Norway also carry some examples of the socially innovative potential of Esports. Mainly this potential is the possibility of including youth with physical disabilities in Esports competitions alongside youth without physical disabilities. In our material, this is best exemplified through the story of Mats. If sports clubs are able to provide youth with different physical abilities the opportunity to play and compete together through the introduction of virtually played sports, a sporting space where everyone’s bodies are equally fast and strong, then Esports would truly be an example of social innovation in sport. Esports do not only challenge our definition of sport, but also our definition of an athlete and of an athletic body. It is perhaps here Esports most radical potential for social innovation lies, if it can become a sporting space where athletes with physical disabilities compete alongside athletes without such disabilities. Still, it is too early to say if Esports will have such socially innovative merits. This potential for social innovation through Esports has not been explored academically, and we know from research that online gaming communities in many cases are riddled with sexual harassment and exclusionary practices towards female players (Taylor et al., 2009). Therefore, our conclusion might be one of cautious optimism. Esports do carry the potential to become an social innovation in modern sport, but to harvest this potential requires a developmental trajectory where the main focus is not commercialized professional sport. Here, the local sport clubs that have started to include Esports in their activities, might be the best place to start such a development towards social innovation in sport.

Note 1. We use the The International Olympic Committee (IOC)’s spelling ‘Esports’.

156

A. TJØNNDAL AND M. SKAUGE

Appendix I: References to Our Material Adresseavisen. (2018a). «Late», overvektige nerder blir de neste OL-heltene [Lazy, overweight nerds will be the next Olympic heroes]. Retrieved 19th April 2019. https://www.adressa.no/pluss/meninger/2018/02/17/%C2% ABLate%C2%BB-overvektige-nerder-blir-de-neste-OL-heltene-16110022.ece. Adresseavisen. (2018b). Se, en sport uten statsorganisert doping [Esports is a sport without organized doping]. Retrieved 19th April 2019. https://www. adressa.no/meninger/kronikker/2018/03/01/Se-en-sport-uten-statsorganis ert-doping-16183360.ece. Adresseavisen. (2018c). På tide at Norge tar datasport inn i varmen [Time for Norway to accept Esports]. Retrieved 19th April 2019. https://www.adr essa.no/meninger/leder/2018/08/20/P%C3%A5-tide-at-Norge-tar-datasp ort-inn-i-varmen-17344844.ece. Adresseavisen. (2019a). Når mye står på spill [When much is at stake. The social aspects of Esports]. Retrieved 19th April 2019. https://www.adressa.no/ pluss/magasin/2019/02/08/N%C3%A5r-mye-st%C3%A5r-p%C3%A5-spill18420872.ece. Adresseavisen. (2019b). Vi kan lære av historien om gameren Mats (25) [We can learn from the story of Mats]. Retrieved 29th June 2019. https://www.adressa.no/meninger/kronikker/2019/03/01/Vi-kanl%C3%A6re-av-historien-om-gameren-Mats-25-18561155.ece. Aftenposten. (2018). Følges av flere hundre millioner: Dette er spørsmålene som må besvares før e-sport kan bli en del av idretten [These are the questions that must be answered before Esports can become part of organized sports. NOC is positive for the inclusion of Esports]. Retrieved 30th June 2019. https://www.aftenposten.no/sport/i/b5kPQB/Folges-av-flere-hundre-mil lioner-Dette-er-sporsmalene-som-ma-besvares-for-e-sport-kan-bli-en-del-avidretten. Aftenposten. (2019). Brann satser på e-sport for å få unge på stadion: - Å spille FIFA er ikke aktivitet, kontrer Molde [Norwegian elite football clubs discussing whether to take part in eFootball]. Retrieved 29th June 2019. https://www.aftenposten.no/sport/fotball/i/8mOmJw/Brann-satser-pa-esport-for-a-fa-unge-pa-Stadion--A-spille-Fifa-er-ikke-aktivitet_-kontrer-Molde. Altaposten. (2018). E-sport blir valgfag [Esports to become elective course]. Retrieved 19th April 2019. https://www.altaposten.no/sport/2018/11/23/ På-denne-skolen-blir-e-sport-valgfag-17934338.ece. Altibox. (2019). Alt klart til e-kamp [Everything set for eSerien]. Retrieved 29th June 2019. https://www.altibox.no/2019/04/09/alt-klart-til-e-kamp/. Avisa Nordland. (2018). Sport eller spill? [Sports or play?] Retrieved 19th April 2019. https://www.an.no/debatt/sport/barn-og-ungdom/sport-ellerspill/o/5-4-907729.

8

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND VIRTUAL SPORT: A CASE …

157

Barnevakten. (2018). De beste i dataspill er i fysisk god form [The best Esports athletes are physically fit]. Retrieved 19th April 2019. https://www.barnev akten.no/e-sport-for-barna/. Bergens Tidende. (2019). Barns skjermbruk øker og øker. Så hvorfor promoterer toppklubbene en konkurranse i TV-spill? [Why does the top football clubs promote a video game competition when children’s screen time increases?] Retrieved 25th May 2019. https://www.bt.no/sport/i/zGxrjq/Barns-skj ermbruk-oker-og-oker-Sa-hvorfor-promoterer-toppklubbene-en-konkurransei-TV-spill. Brann football. (2019). Dette er E-sport [This is Esports. Discussing Brann football club’s Esports involvement]. Retrieved 29th June 2019. https://www. brann.no/brann-e-sport/brann-e-sport/dette-er-e-sport. Bydelsnytt. (2018). På Tiller utdannes Norges nye toppidrettsutøvere [Tiller secondary school educates Norway’s new top (Esports) athletes]. Retrieved 19th April 2019. https://bydelsnytt.no/2018/01/09/utdannes-norges-nyetoppidrettsutovere/. Dagbladet. (2018). E-sport blir stadig større. Nå vurderer NIF et samarbeid [Esports is growing. NOC wants collaboration]. Retrieved 15th April 2019. https://www.dagbladet.no/sport/e-sport-blir-stadig-storre-navurderer-nif-et-samarbeid/69751337. Dagens Næringsliv. (2019). Setter gaming på timeplanen [Esports becomes part of secondary school sports programme]. Retrieved 17th April 2019. https:// www.dn.no/utdannelse/utdannelse/gaming/camilla-stoltenberg/setter-gam ing-pa-timeplanen-mener-det-hindrer-frafall/2-1-561957. Driv sports club. (2019). Norges første E-sport cup for idrettslag [Norway’s first Esport cup for sports clubs]. Retrieved 25th June 2019. https://e-sport.driv-il.no/blog/post/142745/norges-forste-e-sportcup-for-idrettslag-27.04.2019?ispage=true. Eliteserien. (2019). Discovery og norsk toppfotball lanserer e-fotballiga [TV channel and Norwegian top football launches eFootball league. Norsk Tipping (betting company assigned by the government) is open for bets on Esports]. Retrieved 27th June 2019. https://www.eliteserien.no/nyheter/discoveryog-norsk-toppfotball-lanserer-e-fotballiga. Eserien. (2019). Dette er eSerien [This is eSerien]. Retrieved 18th April 2019. https://www.eserien.no/nyheter/dette-er-eserien. Eurosport. (2017). Når får vi se norske OL-deltakere i e-sport? [When do we see Norwegian Olympic Esports participants?] Retrieved 27th June 2019. https://www.eurosport.no/ol/nar-far-vi-se-norske-ol-deltagere-ie-sport_sto6440359/story.shtml. Eurosport. (2019a). VIDEO – Slik oppsummerer de den historiske første kampen i «eSerien» [Summary of the first eSerien fixture]. Retrieved 30th

158

A. TJØNNDAL AND M. SKAUGE

June 2019. https://video.eurosport.no/e-sports/slik-oppsummerer-de-denhistoriske-forste-kampen-i-eserien_vid1184186/video.shtml. Eurosport. (2019b). Ekspertenes dom i Altibox eSerien: Dette blir Norges første seriemester i FIFA [Experts’ verdict on eSerien: This club will be champions]. Retrieved 28th June 2019. https://www.eurosport.no/e-sports/ekspertenesdom-i-altibox-eserien-dette-blir-norges-forste-seriemester-i-fifa_sto7283454/ story.shtml. Fjordenes Tidende. (2019). Gjør gamingen til en del av idrettslaget [Gaming becomes part of the sports club]. Retrieved April 19th 2019. https://www.fjt.no/nyheter/2019/03/01/Gjør-gamingen-til-en-delav-idrettslaget-18573634.ece. Fredrikstad Blad. (2019). Venstre vil satse på e-sport, en stor idrett som vokser raskt [Political party supports Esports]. Retrieved 19th April 2019. https://www.f-b.no/debatt/e-sport/trond-svandal/venstre-vilsatse-pa-e-sport-en-stor-idrett-som-vokser-raskt/o/5-59-1398440. Frogner sports club. (2019). E-sport [Frogner sports club is looking to hire Esports coach]. Retrieved 30th June 2019. https://www.frogneril.no/Fro gner-IL.html?actions=1128:content&idc=782. Gamer. (2016a). Dette skal bli Norges første videregående skole med e-sport på timeplanen [Norway’s first seondary school to include Esports in their sport programme]. Retrieved 30th June 2019. https://www.gamer.no/artikler/ e-sport-dette-skal-bli-norges-forste-videregaende-skole-med-e-sport-pa-timepl anen/224300. Gamer. (2016b). Norske klubber er positive til e-sport på videregående skole [Esports clubs support the inclusion of Esports in secondary school sports programmes]. Retrieved 30th June 2019. https://www.gamer.no/artikler/esport-norske-klubber-er-positive-til-e-sport-pa-videregaende-skole/224358. Gamer. (2016c). Slik blir e-sportilbudet ved Garnes videregående skole [This is the new Esports programme at Garnes secondary school]. Retrieved 30th June 2019. https://www.gamer.no/artikler/intervju-slik-blir-e-sportilbudetved-garnes-videregaende-skole/350689. Gamer. (2016d). Vil være et forbidle for andre jenter [Esports athlete wants to be a role model for girls]. Retrieved 27th June 2019. https://www.gamer. no/artikler/e-sport-vil-vaere-et-forbilde-for-andre-jenter/351416. Gamer. (2017). Får støtte fra idrettskretsen til å drive med e-sport og LAN [Sports club in Drammen gets financial support for including Esports]. Retrieved 30th June 2019. https://www.gamer.no/artikler/e-sport-tradisjon srike-drammens-ballklubb-vil-starte-med-e-sport/367830. Gamer. (2018a). Vi kan løfte frem e-sport politisk dersom vi viser vilje [We can help the development and professionalization of Esports in Norway if we show political will]. Retrieved 30th June 2019. https://www.gamer.no/artikler/les erinnlegg-vi-kan-lofte-frem-e-sport-politisk-dersom-vi-viser-vilje/431892.

8

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND VIRTUAL SPORT: A CASE …

159

Gamer. (2018b). E-sportdagen 2018 – Kulturministier Trine Skei Grande (V) [The Esports day 2018. The Minister of Culture’s speech at the national Esports day]. Retrieved 19th April 2019. https://www.youtube.com/watch? time_continue=15&v=rdsn4ztel64. Gamer. (2019a). Dataspill er kultur, næring og læring [Norwegian political party establishing a gaming policy. Gaming is culture, industry and learning]. Retrieved 30th June 2019. https://www.gamer.no/artikler/arbeiderpartiethar-etablert-en-egen-dataspillpolitikk/463733. Gamer. (2019b). Vålerenga vinner debutsesongen av Eserien [Vålerenga wins the first season of eSerien]. Retrieved 30th June 2019. https://www.gamer.no/ artikler/e-sport-valerenga-vinner-debutsesongen-av-eserien/466194. Gamer. (2019c). MDG vil satse på e-sport [Political party will work for better institutionalization of Esports in Norway]. Retrieved 27th June 2019. https://www.gamer.no/artikler/e-sport-mdg-vil-satse-pa-e-sport/468192. Gausdal secondary school. (2017). Tilbyr e-sport som toppidrett [Esports to be included at Gausdal secondary school’s elite sports programme]. Retrieved 27th June 2019. https://www.oppland.no/nyheter/tilbyr-e-sport-som-top pidrett.70287.aspx. Gudbrandsdølen Dagningen. (2018). Kjønnsforskjeller? E-sport er for alle! [Discussing gender differences in Esports. Esports should be for everyone!] Retrieved 27th June 2019. https://www.gd.no/debatt/leserinnlegg/esport/kjonnsforskjeller-e-sport-er-for-alle/o/5-18-644700. Idrettspolitikk. (2019). Er vi godt nok forberedt på E-sport? [Are we well prepared for Esports?] Retrieved 19th April 2019. https://www.idrettspolit ikk.no/2019/04/kommentar-er-vi-godt-nok-forberedt-pa-esport/. Josimar. (2019a). E-sport er ikke idrett! [Esports is not sports!] Retrieved 17th June 2019. https://www.josimar.no/artikler/e-sport-er-ikke-idrett/5835/. Josimar. (2019b). Jo, e-sport kan være idrett! [Esports have the characteristics of modern sports and it’s challenging the Norwegian sports model. Esports could be considered ‘real’ sports, at least if considering sociological definitions of sports and the goals of the Norwegian sports policies]. Retrieved 20th June 2019. https://www.josimar.no/artikler/jo-e-sport-kan-vaere-idrett/5899/. Journalisten. (2019). Historien om gameren Mats «Ibelin» Steen har forandret livet til NRK-journalist Vicky Schaubert [The journalist of the Mats’ story talks about how the story has changed her life]. Retrieved 7th May 2019. https://journalisten.no/digital-historiefortelling-nett-nettjournalistikk/histor ien-om-gameren-mats-ibelin-steen-har-forandret-livet-til-nrk-journalist-vickyschaubert/349259. Kampanje. (2019). E-sport større enn annen idrett på nett blant unge: - Største populærkulturelle revolusjon siden Beatles [Boss of Discovery TV predicts Esports as the greatest popular cultural revolution since the Beatles]. Retrieved

160

A. TJØNNDAL AND M. SKAUGE

30th June 2019. https://kampanje.com/tech/2019/05/e-sport-slar-annenidrett-pa-nett---storste-popularkulturelle-revolusjonen-siden-beatles/. Klemetsrud sports club. (2019). Oppstart av Klemestrud IL E-sport [Klemetsrud sports club starts new Esports division]. Retrieved 30th June 2019. https:// www.klemetsrudil.no/2019/05/05/oppstart-av-klemetsrud-il-e-sport/. Komplett. (2019). E-sport som idrett [Esports as ‘real’ sports]. Retrieved 30th June 2019. https://www.komplett.no/article/86203/e-sport-er-idrett. Kondis. (2018). E-sport inn i idrettsvarmen? [Esports to become part of organized sports?] Retrieved 19th April 2019. https://www.kondis.no/e-sportinn-i-idrettsvarmen.6158726-321951.html. Konnerud sports club. (2018). KIL eSport [KIL Esports]. Retrieved 25th June 2019. https://www.konnerud.no/5391-2/. Lier sports club. (2019). En oppdatering fra e-sportgjengen [Lier sports club releases Esports team]. Retrieved 30th June 2019. https://lieridrettslag.web org.no/Lier-IL/E-sport.html?actions=1110:content&idc=671. Medier24. (2017). I helga skjøt NRK blink med sin satsing på esport. Og det er en gåte at dette ikke er mer attraktivt for flere medier [It’s a mystery that no more Norwegian TV channels involve in Esports]. Retrieved 27th June 2019. https://www.medier24.no/artikler/i-helga-skjot-nrk-blink-med-sin-sat sing-pa-esport-og-det-er-en-gate-at-dette-ikke-er-mer-attraktivt-for-flere-med ier/414124. Medier24. (2018). VG satser på e-sport og får Harald Strømme med på laget [Big Norwegian newspaper wants to bring Esports to the people as was the case for chess in Norway]. Retrieved 27th June 2019. https://www.medier24.no/artikler/i-samarbeid-med-harald-strommeskal-vg-satse-pa-e-sport-og-telenorligaen/451302. Nettavisen. (2019). 14-åringen har tjent 1,7 millioner kroner på Fortnite [14year-old has earned 1,7 million NOK on Esports]. Retrieved 27th June 2019. https://www.nettavisen.no/livsstil/14-aringen-har-tjent-17-millionerkroner-pa-fortnite/3423647404.html. NFF. (2019a). eFotball: Landslagsuttak [Selection for the national eFootball team]. Retrieved 28th June 2019. https://www.fotball.no/tema/nff-nyh eter/2019/efotball-landslagsuttak/. NFF. (2019b). eFotball: Historisk heldagsseminar [International seminar in Norway discuss the future of eFootball]. Retrieved 28th June 2019. https:// www.fotball.no/tema/nff-nyheter/2019/efotball-historisk-heldagsseminar/. Norskespilleautomater. (2018). Norge bør også anerkjenne e-sport som idrett [Norway should recognize Esports as sports]. Retrieved 19th April 2019. https://www.norskespilleautomater.com/er-esport-en-idrett. NRK. (2016). Som å bli trener for Manchester United [It is as great as becoming the manager of Manchester United. Norwegian Esports coach employed in

8

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND VIRTUAL SPORT: A CASE …

161

prestigious Esports organization]. Retrieved 27th June 2019. https://www. nrk.no/nordland/_-som-a-bli-trener-for-manchester-united-1.13055438. NRK. (2017). Nrk sender CS:Go-finale frå Odense [NRK explains the reason why they broadcasts the CS:Go-final]. Retrieved 29th June 2019. https:// p3.no/nrk-sender-csgo-finale-fra-odense/. NRK. (2018a). Har du barn som “gamer” mye? Her er tipsene til deg som forelder [Tips for parents who have children involved in gaming]. Retrieved 27th June 2019. https://www.nrk.no/nordland/har-du-barn-som-_gamer_mye_-her-er-tipsene-til-deg-som-forelder-1.13971673. NRK. (2018b). Stortingspolitiker: På tide at e-sport blir idrett [Politician: Time for Esports to become sports (politician call for Esports to become part of NOC)]. Retrieved 19th April 2019. https://www.nrk.no/buskerud/stortings politiker_-_-pa-tide-at-e-sport-blir-idrett-1.14000169. NRK. (2018c). Hedda (19) er eneste kvinnelige elev på e-sportlinja [Folk high school offers Esports. However, only one girl participate]. Retrieved 27th June 2019. https://www.nrk.no/nordland/hedda-_19_-er-eneste-kvinneligeelev-pa-e-sportslinja-1.14019248. NRK. (2018d). Tidsspørsmål før e-sport blir større enn langrenn [Esports to become bigger than cross-country skiing. Norwegian headhunted by Swiss Esports team asks Norway to take Esports more seriously]. Retrieved 27th June 2019. https://www.nrk.no/nordland/nicholas-_26_-handplukketav-sveitsisk-storbank-til-unik-e-sportssatsing-1.14192963. NRK. (2018e). E-sport møter kritikk – men Idretts-Norge gir gamerne full støtte [Esports faces criticism, but is supported by NOC federations. NFF and the Norwegian Ice Hockey Association welcome Esports]. Retrieved 19th April 2019. https://www.nrk.no/nordland/e-sport-moter-kritikk-_-men-idr etts-norge-gir-gamerne-full-stotte-1.14196035. NRK. (2018f). Foreldre bør støtte ungdom som vil satse på e-sport [Parents should support youth on Esports engagement]. Retrieved 27th June 2019. https://www.nrk.no/vestfold/_-foreldre-bor-stotte-ungdom-som-vilsatse-pa-e-sport-1.14197002. NRK. (2018g). Medietilsynet reagerer på pengepremier i Fortnite-turnering [The Norwegian Media Authority being sceptical of big cash prices in Fortnite tournament]. Retrieved 29th June 2019. https://www.nrk.no/kultur/med ietilsynet-reagerer-pa-pengepremier-i-fortnite-turnering-1.14224167. NRK. (2018h). Nå kommer de første Fortnite-turneringene i Norge: - Blir det neste store i e-sport [Big cash prize in Norwegian Fortnite tournament]. Retrieved 27th June 2019. https://www.nrk.no/nordland/na-kommer-deforste-fortnite-turneringene-i-norge_-_-blir-det-neste-store-i-e-sport-1.141 89401. NRK. (2019a). Først da Mats var død, forsto foreldrene verdien av gamingen hans [About digital friendships. The story of Mats. Only when Mats was

162

A. TJØNNDAL AND M. SKAUGE

dead did the parents understand the value of his gaming]. Retrieved 19th April 2019. https://www.nrk.no/dokumentar/xl/forst-da-mats-var-dod_-for sto-foreldrene-verdien-av-gamingen-hans-1.14197198. NRK. (2019b). Hvordan gikk datakampen? [How was the computer match? The parental perspective]. Retrieved 19th April 2019. https://www.nrk.no/ ytring/hvordan-gikk-datakampen_-1.14404105. NRK. (2019c). Historien om Mats ut i verden – flere vil skrive ham inn i spillet han elsket [The story of Mats taking the world by storm. The World of Warcraft community wants Mats to become a virtual figure in the game]. Retrieved 3rd May 2019. https://www.nrk.no/norge/historien-om-mats-uti-verden-_-flere-vil-skrive-ham-inn-i-spillet-han-elsket-1.14419865. NRK. (2019d). Idrettslag vil satse på E-sport [Dvergsnes sports club includes Esports for youth]. Retrieved 30th June 2019. https://www.nrk.no/sorlan det/idrettslag-vil-satse-pa-e-sport-1.14454137. NRK. (2019e). Idrettslag skal gi e-sportungdom meir enn berre dataspel [Sports club wants to learn more than Esports to youth. Diet, physical activity and sleep is important]. Retrieved 30th June 2019. https://www.nrk.no/sog nogfjordane/idrettslag-skal-gi-e-sportungdom-meir-enn-berre-dataspel-1.144 83536. NRK. (2019f). Unik studie avliver myte om barn og gaming [Unique study kills myth about children and gaming]. Retrieved 30th June 2019. https://www. nrk.no/viten/ny-ntnu-studie-viser-at-gaming-ikke-pavirker-barns-sosiale-utv ikling-negativt-1.14508488. NRK Beta. (2018). Derfor ser folk på andre som spiller dataspill [Why people watch others play Esports]. Retrieved 19th April 2019. https://nrkbeta.no/ 2018/09/11/derfor-ser-folk-pa-andre-som-spiller-dataspill/. NTB. (2018). E-sport: Idrettsforbundet kan få krevende etikk-spørsmål i fanget [NOC can get demanding ethical questions regarding Esports]. Retrieved 27th June 2019. https://www.vol.no/sport/ntb_sport/2018/12/20/Esport-Idrettsforbundet-kan-f%C3%A5-krevende-etikk-sp%C3%B8rsm%C3% A5l-i-fanget-18108208.ece. Pengespill. (2019). Investor punger ut og lønner Norges beste e-sportlag [Investor pays Norway’s best Esports team]. Retrieved 30th June 2019. https://www.pengespill.com/investor-kjoper-den-regjerende-seriemest eren-spillerne-far-lonn/. Pressfire. (2018). Kommentar: Medietilsynet er forbannet på pengepremier i e-sport, men tunnelsynet er malplassert og lite konsekvent [The Norwegian Media Authority criticize big money prices in Esports children’s competitions. But the arguments are weak]. Retrieved 8th May 2019. https://www.pre ssfire.no/nyheter/PC/13448/Kommentar-Medietilsynet-er-forbannet-p-pen gepremier-i-e-sport-men-tunnelsynet-er-malplassert-og-lite-konsekvent.

8

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND VIRTUAL SPORT: A CASE …

163

Ranheim football. (2019). To trønderske E-sport utøvere har signert for Ranheim [Two Esports players from Trondheim have signed for Ranheim]. Retrieved 19th April 2019. https://www.ranheimfotball.no/nyheter/to-tro nderske-e-sport-utovere-har-signert-for-ranheim. Romsdals Budstikke. (2017). Smak av e-sport og rekordmange jenter under The Gathering [Record number of girl participants and big cash prices in Norwegian Esports competition]. Retrieved 27th June 2019. https:// www.rb.no/data/ungdom/dataspill/smak-av-e-sport-og-rekordmange-jen ter-under-the-gathering/s/5-43-478178. Sosialnytt. (2019). Historien om gameren Mats har gitt mange et nytt syn på dataspill og vennskap [The story of Mats make people all over the world rethink their view on computer games and friendships]. Retrieved 29th June 2019. https://sosialnytt.com/historien-om-gameren-mats-har-gitt-mange-etnytt-syn-pa-dataspill-og-vennskap/. Sotahjornet. (2019). Fuck eserien! [Supporters discussing whether Vålerenga football should promote Esports. Is it right for a sports club to promote the product that is the main cause of the increasing obesity rates in Norway?] Retrieved 19th April 2019. https://www.sotahjornet.no/?p=11490. Soundcloud. (2018). Tidenes første landskamp i eFotball [NFF’s Esports involvement. On the first ever international eFootball match]. Retrieved 29th June 2019. https://soundcloud.com/user-213783432/21-tidenes-forste-lan dskamp-i-efotball. SpareBank1. (2019). SpareBank1 heier på e-sport – blir hovedpartner for eSerien [SpareBank1 becomes a main partner of eSerien]. Retrieved 30th June 2019. https://nyhetssenter.sparebank1.no/blog/2019/04/05/sparebank-1heier-pa-e-sport-blir-hovedpartner-for-eserien/. Sunnmørsposten. (2019). Til våren starter historisk liga i Norge: - Vi er veldig spente [eFootball league starts this spring. The elite clubs are excited]. Retrieved 29th June 2019. https://www.smp.no/100Sport/fotball/Tilvaren-starter-historisk-liga-i-Norge--Vi-er-veldig-spente-270235b.html. Telenor. (2018). E-sport: Lek, sport eller idrett? [Esports: play or sports?] Retrieved 19th April 2019. https://www.telenor.no/om/teknologi-norge/ esport.jsp. Vagsbygd secondary school. (2018). Breddeidrett og toppidrett E-Sport [New Esports programme at Vågsbygd secondary school]. Retrieved 30th June 2019. https://vagsbygd.vgs.no/utdanningsprogram/studiespesialisere nde/breddeidrett-og-toppidrett-e-sport/. Venstre. (2018). E-sport – en idrett for framtida [Esports—The sport of the future]. Retrieved 19th April 2019. https://www.venstre.no/artikkel/2018/ 08/21/e-sport-en-idrett-for-framtida/. Vesteraalens Avis. (2019). Foreldrene engasjerer seg ikke like mye som i annen sport [Parental involvement in Esports. Parents do not engage in it like other

164

A. TJØNNDAL AND M. SKAUGE

youth sports]. Retrieved 19th April 2019. https://www.vol.no/nyheter/ sortland/2019/03/19/%E2%80%93-Innen-gaming-som-s%C3%A5-mangedriver-med-er-inntrykket-at-foreldrene-ikke-engasjerer-seg-like-mye-som-iannen-sport-18686519.ece. VG. (2017). Emilie: Norges uoffisielle dronning av Twitch [Norway’s unofficial Esports queen]. Retrieved 27th June 2019. https://www.vg.no/annonsori nnhold/smart/komplett/424-jenter-som-gamer-emilie-er-norges-uoffisielledronning-av-twitch. VG. (2018a). Åpner for dataspilling som OL-gren [IOC opens for Esports as Olympic sport]. Retrieved 27th June 2019. https://www.vg.no/sport/i/3jB K69/aapner-for-dataspilling-som-ol-gren. VG. (2018b). Disse jentene brenner for gaming [These girls are passionate gamers]. Retrieved 27th June 2019. https://www.vg.no/annonsorinnhold/ smart/komplett/584-female-legends-disse-jentene-brenner-for-gaming. VG. (2018c). Fire landslagsdebutanter i en ny æra for NFF:- Man er selvfølgelig nervøs [NFF into a new era]. Retrieved 28th June 2019. https://www.vg. no/sport/i/6nGoGW/fire-landslagsdebutanter-i-en-ny-aera-for-nff-man-erselvfoelgelig-nervoes?utm_source=inline-teaser&utm_content=ddxRGJ. VG. (2018d). Derfor satser NFF på e-sport: Kan gaming få ungdom opp av sofaen? [Can gaming get youth off the couch? Why NOC wants Esports]. Retrieved 19th April 2019. https://www.vg.no/nyheter/meninger/i/bK1 4JB/derfor-satser-nff-paa-e-sport-kan-gaming-faa-ungdom-opp-av-sofaen. VG. (2018e). Tom Tvedt vil ha e-sport inn i NIF [NOC president wants Esports included]. Retrieved 19th April 2019. https://www.vg.no/sport/i/9mJr4E/ tom-tvedt-vil-ha-e-sport-inn-i-nif. VG. (2019a). I sin egen grotte [In their own cave. The story of the gamer Mats Steen is one of the most important stories of our time, helping us to understand the enormous positive value gaming might have for young people]. Retrieved 29th June 2019. https://www.vg.no/nyheter/meninger/ i/l1PMG3/i-sin-egen-grotte. VG. (2019b). Satser tungt på «eSerien 2019» – 18 norske klubber med i FIFA-turnering [18 football clubs included in eSerien]. Retrieved 28th June 2019. https://www.vg.no/sport/fotball/i/ddxRGJ/satser-tungt-paaeserien-2019-18-norske-klubber-med-i-fifa-turnering.

References Archetti, E. P. (2003). Den norske «idrettsmodellen»: Et kritisk blikk på sivilt samfunn i Norge [The Norwegian ‘sports model’: A critical look at civil society in Norway]. Norsk antropologisk tidsskrift, 14(1), 8–15.https://www.idunn.no/nat/2003/01/den_norske_idrettsmodel len_et_kritisk_blikk_pa_sivilt_samfunn_i_norge.

8

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND VIRTUAL SPORT: A CASE …

165

Arneberg, E. J., & Hegna, K. (2018). Virtuelle grenseutfordringer. Symbolske grenser i spill i The League of Legends [Virtual boundary challenges. Symbolic boundaries at play in the league of legends]. Norsk sosiologisk tidsskrift, 2(3), 259–274.https://www.idunn.no/norsk_sosiologisk_tidssk rift/2018/03/virtuelle_grenseutfordringer. Bakken, A. (2018). Ungdata 2018. Nasjonale resultater [The Norwegian youth survey 2018. National results]. Oslo: The Norwegian Institute for Research on Adolescence, Welfare and Aging. https://www.hioa.no/Om-OsloMet/ Senter-for-velferds-og-arbeidslivsforskning/NOVA/Publikasjonar/Rappor ter/2018/Ungdata-2018.-Nasjonale-resultater. Bakken, A. (2019). Idrettens posisjon i ungdomstida. Hvem deltar og hvem slutter i ungdomsidretten? [The position of organized sports in adolescence. Who participates and who drop out of sports?] Oslo: The Norwegian Institute for Research on Adolescence, Welfare and Aging. https://fagarkivet-hioa. archive.knowledgearc.net/bitstream/handle/20.500.12199/1298/NOVARapport-2-2019-Idrettens-posisjon-i-ungdomstida-25-februar-2019.pdf?seq uence=1&isAllowed=y. BBC. (2017). esports: International Olympic Committee considering esports for future Games. Retrieved 25th June 2019. https://www.bbc.com/sport/oly mpics/41790148. BBC. (2019). My disabled son’s amazing gaming life in the World of Warcraft. Retrieved 11th May 2019. https://www.bbc.com/news/disability47064773. Bertozzi, E. (2008). ‘You play like a girl!’: Cross-gender competition and the uneven playing field. Convergence, 14(4), 473–487. https://doi.org/10. 1177/1354856508094667. Bjørner, T. (2014). ‘You’ve been in the house too long, she said, and I naturally fled’. An analysis of habitus among Danish e-sport players. Scandinavian Sports Studies Forum, 5, 149–66. https://sportstudies.org/wp-content/upl oads/2014/12/149-166_vol_5_2014_bjorner.pdf. Bratberg, Ø. (2017). Tekstanalyse for samfunnsvitere [Textual analysis in the social sciences]. Oslo: Cappelen Damm Akademisk. Children and the Media Survey. (2018). Barn og dataspill [Children and computer games]. Oslo: The Norwegian Media Authority. https://www.med ietilsynet.no/globalassets/publikasjoner/barn-og-medier-undersokelser/dat aspill-tallgrunnlag-februar-2018.pdf. Conway, S. (2010). ‘It’s in the game’ and above the game. An analysis of the users of sports videogames. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 16(3), 334–354. https://doi.org/10.1177/135 4856510367560. Drewe, S. (2003). Why sport? Toronto, ON: Thompson.

166

A. TJØNNDAL AND M. SKAUGE

Eklund, L., & Roman, S. (2018). Digital gaming and young people’s friendships: A mixed methods study of time use and gaming in school. Young, 27 (1), 32–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/1103308818754990. Ferguson, C. J., & Wang, J. C. K. (2019). Aggressive video games are not a risk factor for future aggression in youth: A longitudinal study. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 48, 1439–1451. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-019-010 69-0. Funk, D. C., Pizzo, A. D., & Baker, B. J. (2018). eSport management: Embracing eSport education and research opportunities. Sport Management Review, 21, 7–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2017.07.008. Hallmann, K., & Giel, T. (2018). eSports—Competitive sports or recreational activity? Sport Management Review, 21, 14–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. smr.2017.07.011. Heere, B. (2018). Embracing the sportification of society: Defining e-sports through a polymorphic view on sport. Sports Management Review, 21(1), 21–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2017.07.002. Hutchins, B. (2008). Signs of meta-change in second modernity: The growth of e-sport and the World Cyber Games. New Media & Society, 10(6), 851–869. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444808096248. Hygen, B. W., Belsky, J., Stenseng, F., Skalicka, V., Kvande, M. N., ZahlThanem, T., & Wichstrøm, L.(2019). Time spent gaming and social competence in children: Reciprocal effects across childhood. Child Development, 91(1), 861–875. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13243. IOC. (2018). Olympic movement, esports and gaming communities meet at the esports forum. Retrieved 25th June. https://www.olympic.org/news/olympicmovement-esports-and-gaming-communities-meet-at-the-esports-forum. Janz, J., & Martens, L. (2005). Gaming at a LAN event: The social context of playing video games. New Media and Society, 7 (3), 333–355. https://doi. org/10.1177/1461444805052280. Jenny, S. E., et al. (2017). Virtual(ly) athletes: Where eSports Fit within the definition of “sport.” Quest, 69(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/00336297. 2016.1144517. Jonasson, K., & Thiborg, J. (2010). Electronic sport and its impact on future sport. Sport in Society, 13(2), 287–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/174304 30903522996. Kozinets, R. V. (2002). The field behind the screen: Using netnography for marketing research in online communities. Journal of Marketing Research, 39(1), 61–72. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.39.1.61.18935. Kühn, S., Kugler, D. T., Schmalen, K., Weichenberger, M., Witt, C., & Gallinat, J. (2018). Does playing violent video games cause aggression? A longitudinal intervention study. Molecular Psychiatry, 24(8), 1220–1234. https://doi.org/ 10.1038/s41380-018-0031-7.

8

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND VIRTUAL SPORT: A CASE …

167

Langer, R., & Beckman, S. (2005). Sensitive research topics: Netnography revisited. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 8(2), 189–203. https://doi.org/10.1108/13522750510592454. Lee, D., & Schoenstedt, L. J. (2011). Comparison of eSports and traditional sports consumption motives. Journal of Research in Health, Physical Education, Recreation, Sport & Dance, 6(2), 39–45. https://files.eric.ed.gov/ful ltext/EJ954495.pdf. Llorens, M. R. (2017). eSport gaming: The rise of a new sports practice. Sport, Ethics and Philosophy, 11(4), 464–476. https://doi.org/10.1080/17511321. 2017.1318947. Martoncik, M. (2015). e-Sports: Playing just for fun or playing to satisfy life goals? Computers in Human Behavior, 48, 208–211. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.chb.2015.01.056. McKeown, M. (2008). The truth about innovation. London, UK: Prentice Hall. Morgan, L. (2019). Liam Morgan: Esports is coming to the Olympics after all as Paris 2024 reveal ideas to improve fan engagement. Retrieved 19th April 2019. https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1075990/liam-morganesports-is-coming-to-the-olympics-after-all-as-paris-2024-reveal-ideas-to-imp rove-fan-engagement. Mulgan, G. (2012). The theoretical foundation of social innovation. In A. Nicholls & A. Murdock (Eds.), Social innovation: Blurring boundaries to reconfigure markets. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Musingslif (2013). Musings of life. My escape (Mats on his life as handicapped and how he ‘escapes’ into the world of gaming). Retrieved 30th June 2019. https:// musingslif.blogspot.com/2013/07/my-escape.html. NOC. (2019). English. Retrieved 25th June 2019. https://www.idrettsforbu ndet.no/english/. Parry, J. (2019). E-sports are not sports. Sports, Ethics and Philosophy, 13(1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/17511321.2018.1489419. Rayat, P. (2017). E-sport in i idrottsrörelsen? - Idrottsföreningar och deras uppfattningar om och förhållningssätt till framtida e-sport i den egna verksamheten [Esports into the national sports association?—Sports clubs and their notions and attitudes towards future Esports within their own organizations]. Umeå: Umeå University. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1178630/ FULLTEXT01.pdf. Seippel, Ø., & Skille, E. (2019). Sports participation in Norway. In K. Green, T. Sigurjónsson, & E. Skille (Eds.), Sport in Scandinavia and the Nordic countries. London: Routledge. Stefansen, K., Smette, I., & Strandbu, Å. (2018). Understanding the increase in parents’ involvement in organized youth sports. Sport, Education and Society, 23(2), 162–172. https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2016.1150834.

168

A. TJØNNDAL AND M. SKAUGE

Strandbu, Å., Bakken, A., & Sletten, M. A. (2017). Exploring the minoritymajority gap in sport participation: Different patterns for boys and girls? Sport in Society, 22(4), 606–624. https://doi.org/10.1080/17430437.2017.138 9056. Tassi, P. (2013). The U.S. now recognizes eSports players as professional athletes. Retrieved 27th June 2019. https://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2013/ 07/14/the-u-s-now-recognizes-esports-players-as-professional-athletes/#657 1776a3ac9. Taylor, N., Jenson, J., & Castell, S. (2009). Cheerleaders/booth babes/Halo hoes: Pro-gaming, gender and jobs for the boys. Digital Creativity, 20(4), 239–252. https://doi.org/10.1080/14626260903290323. The Conversation (2018). Why e-sports should not be in the Olympics. Retrieved 25th June 2019. https://theconversation.com/why-e-sports-should-not-bein-the-olympics-100430. Thiel, A., & John, J. M. (2019). Is eSport a ‘real’ sport? Reflections on the spread of virtual competitions. European Journal for Sport and Society, 15(4), 311–315. https://doi.org/10.1080/16138171.2018.1559019. Tjønndal, A., Hjelseth, A., & Lenneis, V. (2019). Fra presentasjon til prestasjon? Sportifisering av skateboard i Norge [From self-expression to competition? The sportification of Norwegian skateboarding]. Scandinavian Sports Studies Forum, 10, 89–116. https://sportstudies.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/ 05/089-116_vol_10_2019_tjonndaletal.pdf. Trepte, S., Reinecke, L., & Juechems, K. (2012). The social side of gaming: How playing online computer games creates online and offline social support. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(3), 832–839. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.chb.2011.12.003. Whitepaper 26. (2012). Den norske idrettsmodellen [The Norwegian sports model]. Oslo: Ministry of Culture. https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dokume nter/meld-st-26-20112012/id684356/. Witkowski, E. (2012). On the digital playing field: How we “do sport” with networked computer games. Games and Culture, 7 (5), 349–374. https:// doi.org/10.1177/1555412012454222. Xu, H. (2012). The retrospective analysis of China E-sports club. IERI Procedia, 2, 690–695. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ieri.2012.06.155.

CHAPTER 9

Footbag Freestyle: Innovation in the Organization and Practice of Sport Verena Lenneis and Anne Tjønndal

Introduction Footbag—more widely known as ‘hacky sack’—is a group or individual activity played with a small ball filled with stones, metal, plastic or sand (a footbag/hacky sack) that is controlled by the feet. Although the origins of footbag are thought to lie in South-East Asia, where people have played games like shuttlecock, sepak takraw and chinlone1 for centuries, footbag in its current form was first invented in the 1970s. In 1972, two US Americans, John Stalberger and Mike Marshall, made their first beanbags, which they called and patented as ‘hacky sacks’. In 1983—when Stalberger and Marshall’s game had increased in popularity—the American

V. Lenneis (B) Sports and Social Issues, Department of Health Science and Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark e-mail: [email protected] A. Tjønndal Faculty of Social Sciences, Nord University, Bodø, Norway e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 A. Tjønndal (ed.), Social Innovation in Sport, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63765-1_9

169

170

V. LENNEIS AND A. TJØNNDAL

toy company Wham’O (which at this point already owned the trademarks ‘Frisbee’ and ‘Hula Hoop’) bought the brand name ‘Hacky Sack’. Consequently, Hacky Sack is now the name of a trademarked brand of footbags. Footbag has different forms of play, with the three most common being: (1) circle kicking, (2) footbag net and (3) footbag freestyle. By far the most popular game is circle kicking, where a group of people kick a footbag around in a circle and try to prevent it from touching the ground for as long as possible. This is what people usually have in mind when they hear and talk about hacky sack. Footbag net can be described as a team sport played over a badminton-high net, while ‘footbag freestyle’ is a predominantly individual activity and involves performing a series of tricks with a footbag, where a trick’s end position becomes the next trick’s start position. A footbag trick consists of different components, such as dexterities (the legs circle the footbag), spins or ducks (the footbag passes or circles the neck). As players can combine these different components and chain different tricks together, the number of tricks and combinations is almost unlimited.2 Consequently, over the last four decades footbag freestyle has evolved into a highly technical—and competitive—activity. The first World Footbag Championships took place in 1980 and the first European Championships in 1999—both of which have been held annually ever since. In addition, a range of other events and national tournaments take place every year. Despite the fact that footbag is played in many different (although predominantly western) countries, the number of footbag players worldwide is small. As of April 2020, 279 clubs in 38 countries were registered on the website https://www.footbag.org,3 which represents a main international gathering point for the footbag community. Similar to other lifestyle sports (Wheaton, 2013), the exact number of footbag players is difficult to pinpoint. This is mainly due to the informal and countercultural nature of lifestyle sports, where the focus of the activity is often on individuality, self-expression and creativity. Hence, lifestyle sports such as footbag have a history of resisting the bureaucracy, structures, rules and regulations that often come with organized sport (Turner, 2013; Wheaton, 2005, 2013). This also includes being part of a sports club and keeping track of the number of players involved in the activity (Tomlinson, Ravenscroft, Wheaton, & Gilchrist, 2005).

9

FOOTBAG FREESTYLE: INNOVATION IN THE ORGANIZATION …

171

Although an International Footbag Players’ Association exists, its website is outdated and instead social media platforms, such as Instagram and Facebook,4 have become the places for online discussions about footbag freestyle. Footbag has remained largely uncommercialized and un-bureaucratized and consequently, there are very few professional players worldwide who can make a living from playing footbag. The lack of use of mass-produced gear exemplifies the alternative position of the sport. It is common for footbag players to sew their own freestyle bags, while the European non-profit footbag organization ‘planetfootbag’5 produces the footbag community’s own footbag freestyle shoes at a discount price for players. Until now, footbag has not received any scholarly attention within sport innovation studies or in the leisure and lifestyle sports literature. Therefore, the purpose of this chapter is to give voice to individuals who are deeply engaged in this ‘new’ lifestyle sport and explore, if there are sides of footbag freestyle that represent social innovation in sport. Specifically, we will examine the benefits and importance footbag freestyle players ascribe to their participation in the sport and how these are connected to social innovation. The chapter begins with a literature review of previous research on the type of sport that footbag can be most closely related to, namely lifestyle sports—with a focus on social innovation. Secondly, we present the methods on which the analysis in this chapter is based, including interviews with 17 footbag freestyle players from different countries who all attended the World Footbag Championships held in 2015 in Copenhagen, Denmark. We then present the study’s findings and discuss them against the backdrop of a social innovation perspective and the reviewed literature.

Social Innovation and Lifestyle Sports Social innovation in sport has gained attention from both innovation and sport scholars in the last five years (Tjønndal, 2018b; Tjønndal & Nilssen, 2019; Undlien, 2019), but there are few studies that focus on innovation, social or otherwise, in lifestyle sports. For instance, Ratten (2019) explores how the Santa Cruz, California World Surfing Reserve represents a social innovation. Ratten (2019) concludes that the World Surfing Reserves are socially innovative because they include programmes that utilize surfing as a way to connect people to the environment and sustainability issues.

172

V. LENNEIS AND A. TJØNNDAL

In a study of social innovation in skateboarding Tjønndal (2018a) explores a seasonal event called “Girl Skate Camp” in Norway. Tjønndal’s (2018a) research highlights how the loose structure of skateboarding practices and the informal culture of Norwegian skateboarding clubs makes skateboarding an innovative alternative to organized youth sport that attracts youths who were either not interested in participating in traditionally organized competitive sport, or, who dropped out of organized sport because of the hierarchical relationship between coach and athlete in traditionally organized youth sports (Tjønndal, 2018a). Related, but not quite in the field of social innovation in lifestyle sports are the works of Hienerth (2006) and of Hienerth, Von Hippel, and Berg Jensen (2014). These studies investigate innovation in kayaking. Both studies highlight the importance of user involvement for the development of successful commercial innovations in the kayaking industry. In other words, they argue that consumers (or ‘user innovators’) are behind the most prolific product innovations in kayaking (Hienerth et al., 2014). Whilst Ratten (2019) focuses on innovation and sustainability, and Hienerth et al. (2014) pinpoint product innovation, we aim to use footbag as a case to explore social innovations in the ways we practice and organize sport. In this sense, our work in this chapter can be read as an extensions of Tjønndal’s (2018a) research on skateboarding as a socially innovative alternative to competitive youth sport, where we empirically explore the social innovation potential of footbag freestyle as a lifestyle sport. While innovation is still a relatively small topic in research on lifestyle sports6 , there is a substantial body of research that has studied the characteristics of such sporting activities. Such activities include skateboarding (e.g. Atencio, Beal, & Wilson, 2009; Beal et al., 2017), snowboarding (e.g. Thorpe, 2011), BMX (e.g. Edwards & Corte, 2010), surfing (e.g. Wheaton, 2013), parkour (e.g. Clegg & Butryn, 2012), unicycling (e.g. Bignold, 2013) and ultimate frisbee (e.g. Crocket, 2013). Although each of these activities has its own history and specific characteristics, they all share a “common ethos distinct from that of traditional sport ” (Tomlinson et al., 2005, p. 8). Typically, these “are activities that either ideologically or practically provide alternatives to mainstream sports and to mainstream sport values ” (Rinehart, 2000, p. 506), and involve the consumption of a new object (e.g. boards, discs etc.). Consequently, lifestyle sport participants have traditionally opposed regulation, institutionalization (such as clubs, coaches or officials) and conventional forms of competition.

9

FOOTBAG FREESTYLE: INNOVATION IN THE ORGANIZATION …

173

In his works, Rinehart (2000) actually quotes a footbag player experiencing footbag as a form of meditation to explain the divergent, non-competitive ethos of lifestyle sports. However, this is the only mention of footbag we have been able to find in the lifestyle sports literature. The literature describes lifestyle sports as being focused on fun, self-actualization, flow, challenging the self and other intrinsic rewards (Wheaton, 2005, 2013). In other words, lifestyle sports tend to be “expressive sports”, where many participants are conscious of being seen and presenting themselves to others and consider their activity as a means of creative and aesthetic expression, sometimes even as a form of art (Rinehart, 2000). Not surprisingly, activities are mostly individualistic in nature—although many participants ascribe great importance to the specific lifestyle sport community (Gilchrist & Wheaton, 2017). However, the rapid growth in popularity of some lifestyle sports— often driven by the media and multinational corporate companies—has led to significant changes in the lifestyle sportscape (Wheaton, 2013). Consequently, numerous studies have explored the influence of corporate forces and state funding on lifestyle sports cultures, analyzing in particular processes of commercialization, increased regulation, sportification7 and professionalization (e.g. Edwards & Corte, 2010; Thorpe & Dumont, 2018; Thorpe & Wheaton, 2011; van Bottenburg & Salome, 2010; Wheaton, 2013). This body of research emphasizes that these processes are complex, fluid and contradictory, in that they involve multifaceted relationships, struggles and tensions between different groups, such as the media, corporations, sport organizations, policymakers and lifestyle sport participants, all of which often pursue competing goals and interests. For example, Thorpe and Wheaton’s (2011) study of the cultural politics surrounding the incorporation of windsurfing, snowboarding and BMX into the Olympic programme provides insights into the tensions between the different key agents, particularly between the International Olympic Committee and the respective lifestyle sports communities. Studies have also shown that the attitudes of lifestyle sports participants are often ambiguous and contradictory. Beal and Wilson (2004), for example, describe how skaters try to protect core values of skateboarding, such as intrinsic motivation to skate, individualism, self-expression or creative and artistic sensibility, while at the same time enjoying new possibilities like sponsorship. Beal and Wilson (2004) remark that particularly younger generations of skaters have become less critical of increased commercialization and “selling out”. These findings are consistent with Thorpe

174

V. LENNEIS AND A. TJØNNDAL

(2011, p. 29), who notes that today’s snowboard generation typically accept mass-mediated events such as the X-Games or corporate sponsorship, acknowledging “the benefits offered to athletes and participants in this hypercommercial context (e.g. opportunities for athletes to travel, well organized and widely publicized events, more affordable equipment)”. The existing literature on the lifestyle sportscape sets the frame for the study of footbag. However, it should be emphasized that the current body of research has mostly focused on popular lifestyle sports that have been subjected to commercialization. On the other hand, smaller and uncommercialized activities, such as footbag freestyle, remain widely unexplored. Therefore, the present study contributes to the lifestyle sports literature by exploring an activity that has hardly been influenced by corporate forces and is far away from “becoming mainstream” and an Olympic discipline.

Methods The empirical material for this chapter consists of semi-structured, individual interviews (Brinkmann & Kvale, 2015; Kvale, 2007) with seventeen footbag freestyle players who attended the 36th World Footbag Championships, which took place in August 2015 in Copenhagen, Denmark. We used a purposeful sampling strategy (Patton, 2015) to identify potential interviewees. In order to gain a nuanced picture of the perspectives and experiences of footbag freestyle players, we invited a number of male and female players from different countries (and continents) and with different footbag skill levels to participate in the interview study. The first author’s ‘insider’ status (at the time of the study, Verena had been part of the footbag freestyle scene for 13 years) was very helpful in the recruitment of interviewees. Verena contacted the seventeen players via social media a month prior to the World Footbag Championships, all of whom expressed willingness to take part in an interview during the event. In addition, they filled out a short questionnaire asking for sociodemographic information and key facts about the players’ footbag path before the interviews were held. Some main characteristics of the interviewees are summarized in Table 9.1. The interviewees’ real names have been replaced by pseudonyms. The first author conducted all the interviews, which lasted between 1.5 and 3 hours and took place either in a meeting room at the event site, the author’s home, or the apartments at which the interviewees were staying. The semi-structured interviews (Brinkmann & Kvale, 2015; Kvale, 2007)

9

FOOTBAG FREESTYLE: INNOVATION IN THE ORGANIZATION …

Table 9.1 The interviewees

175

Pseudonym

Country of origin

Age

Played footbag since

Adriana Dawid Erica Florian Guillaume Ines Jeremy Johannes Kasia Lisa Nathan Noam Robert Sarah Thomas Villads Wesley

Spain/Mexico Poland Canada Austria Canada Austria USA Germany Poland Australia USA Israel Canada Switzerland USA Denmark Australia

26 31 25 32 33 31 28 28 29 40 26 33 29 25 35 22 30

2005 2002 2007 2002 2004 2008 2003 2000 2001 2002 2003 2007 2003 2004 1997 2004 2005

were conducted in English (12), German (4) and Danish (1) and were guided by an interview guide focusing on different topics, such as the players’ footbag and sporting biographies, the role of footbag in their lives, the footbag scene, their attitudes to competition, commercialization and professionalization, their everyday lives and other hobbies. The interviews were recorded, transcribed and subsequently thematically analyzed (Braun‚ Clarke & Weate‚ 2016; Braun & Clarke‚ 2019) with the aid of the software program NVivo. Following Braun and Clarke’s (Braun, Clarke & Weate, 2016; Braun & Clarke, 2019) step-by-step guide to conducting thematic analysis, we first became familiar with the data by transcribing the interviews, rereading the transcripts and taking notes. We then coded the transcripts with both data-driven codes (e.g. player’s style or previous sport experiences) and theory-driven codes (e.g. sportification or institutionalization). In a next step, we grouped the codes and developed (initial) themes such as creativity or anti-mainstream, exploring specifically the relationship between the codes, e.g. between the small size of the footbag community, the search for distinction and (non-)commercialization. Finally, we reviewed these themes and connected them to the reviewed literature and

176

V. LENNEIS AND A. TJØNNDAL

a social innovation framework by paying particular attention to complex processes such as sportification, regulation and marginalization. Throughout the research process the authors applied self-reflexivity to reflect on insider–outsider positions, in particular on how the first author’s previous strong involvement in the footbag scene affected the production of knowledge. Verena’s in-depth knowledge about footbag and own experiences of it proved to be a great advantage with regard to gaining access to the field and empathizing with the interviewees, although this also led to concerns about maintaining a certain analytical distance (see also Thorpe, 2011). Therefore, discussions between the first and second author (who was not familiar with the footbag scene) were useful and helped us to navigate between our insider and outsider positions.

Footbag Freestyle: An Innovative Anti-Mainstream Alternative to Organized Competitive Sport? We structure our analysis of the interview data in three themes related to our exploration of social innovation in footbag freestyle. These themes are: (1) creativity, (2) independence from others, structure and norms, and finally, (3) the footbag community: anti-mainstream? Creativity Creativity was an innovative aspect of playing footbag that was highlighted by the interviewees. Firstly, they linked creativity to ‘style’—a (vague) term that they used to describe how a person played. When talking about style, the interviewees mostly referred to a player’s execution of a trick (e.g. making a difficult trick look effortless), or their trick selection. Notably, the players connected the many tricks and combinations available in footbag with creativity, because it gave every player the opportunity to develop a unique way of playing. Erica, for example, found that footbag gave people the opportunity to “express yourself in a creative way. In a way that no-one’s ever done it before”. Lisa also explained: So you do have the option to not play the same way other people are playing. You can do it your own way, and in your own style and it’s totally up to you. It doesn’t have to be a reproduction of the way someone else plays.

9

FOOTBAG FREESTYLE: INNOVATION IN THE ORGANIZATION …

177

Other interviewees, like Villads, felt that a person’s style revealed their personality: “I think that you can see people’s personality. The way you play footbag clearly reflects who and how you are.” Related to the opportunity to express themselves, many of the players compared footbag with other creative acts, such as dancing, painting or writing. Here, several interviewees particularly linked one form of competition—routine, where players created a choreography to a chosen piece of music—to creativity. For Jeremy, planning a routine was like writing a poem, where he became the artist: It became like writing a story that I’m going to read out loud to someone. You know like a beautiful poem, that every word has to fit perfectly. Because if it doesn’t, it throws off the poem in general. It has to flow. You know, and that’s really the same thing with a routine.

Later in the interview, Jeremy compared a footbag routine to a painting: “You don’t just wanna hang it up in your room and have like two people come and see it, you want to show it to the whole world. Why just keep it to myself? That’s selfish”. Indeed, many of the interviewees described footbag as “an act of creation” (Johannes) or “a form of art ” (Guillaume), with only one interviewee considering himself a professional athlete. The creative aspect of play emphasized by the interviewees is also recognized by the lifestyle sports literature (Wheaton, 2013). However, the increased commercialization of lifestyle sports seems to have changed the attitudes and perceptions of the participants, with the younger generation often viewing themselves as professional athletes (Tjønndal, Hjelseth, & Lenneis, 2019; Turner, 2013). The strong focus on creativity among the footbag players we interviewed can be explained by the fact that footbag has not been subjected to a commercialization process in the same way as other lifestyle sports have (Thorpe & Wheaton, 2011; Tjønndal et al., 2019). While such processes have transformed skateboard, surfing and snowboarding into Olympic disciplines and created a divide amongst participants (where some focus on elite performance and others on originality and creativity), this does not apply to footbag. Nevertheless, although creativity seems to be a core value among footbag players, their statements also point to ambiguities. In the following parts of the analysis we explore these ambiguities.

178

V. LENNEIS AND A. TJØNNDAL

Independence from Others, Structures and Norms When describing the alternative nature of footbag the interviewees often compared it to traditionally organized sports, emphasizing its differences in structure and ethos: I played football at the time I started to play footbag. I was hooked by all the freedom footbag offered… that you didn’t have so many obligations. […] Football got quite serious in the end. And that’s what I got tired of. […] I just couldn’t stand it anymore. Things were dictated by the coach. […] Whereas in footbag, I could express myself and develop. The main difference with footbag was that I didn’t have to do something specific. I could just do what I wanted. (Villads)

Unlike Villads, many of the interviewees had not been involved in other, more traditionally organized sports. However, many shared a general dislike of traditionally organized sports—often team sports—where they were worried about group dynamics and did not want to be blamed for their mistakes. Kasia explained: “I stopped liking sports when we had PE in school and they made us, for example, play volleyball. […] When someone makes me do something, I lose interest immediately and I want to do exactly the opposite.” In contrast, the interviewees described the individual activity of footbag as a pursuit that was “all about me”, where they felt “like I’m boss […]. I can decide everything ” (Adriana). The players’ statements closely resemble those in a recent article about lifestyle sports in Norway (Säfvenbom, Wheaton, & Agans, 2018, p. 10), which revolved around the comment of a downhill biker: “If someone tries to control what I am doing when I am biking I will quit. How can you enjoy sports if you are under control by others?” In that interview study the authors argued that alternative lifestyle sports environments should not be regarded as unorganized, but as self-organized. This finding also seems to fit the footbag scene and our interviewees, for whom it seemed to be crucial to take responsibility for their learning, including the contexts and speed at which this learning took place. The self-organization of footbag freestyle certainly represents an innovation in the way sport is organized, especially if the starting point is football, swimming or other traditionally organized sports where a coach is in charge of the sport practiced on a day-to-day basis. However, despite the interviewees’ emphasis on the difference of footbag from ‘traditional’ sports, many players still stressed that footbag was a sport, with sweat and exhaustion as ‘proof’:

9

FOOTBAG FREESTYLE: INNOVATION IN THE ORGANIZATION …

179

I’ve experienced that people ask me what I do. I tell them that I do sports. ‘What kind of sports?’ they ask. I tell them I play footbag… or hacky sack, because most people don’t know what footbag is. ‘What??!! That’s a sport?’ they wonder. And you think, ‘yeah, that’s a sport. You sweat a lot and it’s really exhausting.’ (Ines)

Sarah, too, pointed out that she did footbag performances and workshops to promote footbag, because “footbag… or rather hacky sack has this kind of negative image. Like a lunch break activity”. For Sarah it was important to show that footbag was strenuous and a “serious, well-organized sport with rules and tournaments ”. Sarah’s and Ines’ statements testify to the interviewees’ wishes to distance themselves from the casual activity of circle kicking, often referred to as hacky sack. This might seem surprising at first glance, but can be explained by the prejudices and lack of understanding of other people: many players experienced that the public did not recognize the effort and training it took to become accomplished at footbag. Likewise, Dawid, a footbag official, explained that the International Footbag Players’ Organization strove to promote footbag as a serious sport: We [IFPA] try to show freestyle footbag like an Olympic sport, and this is our goal at the IFPA, to actually show footbag in general as a professional sport. And that we call ourselves athletes. We need perfect conditions… that’s why we have tournaments in the gym, indoors, not in the clubs, not like outdoors or in the sun.

Other statements pointed to the ambivalences many of the interviewees felt. This is in line with other studies that report that the attitudes of lifestyle sports participants are frequently contradictory, for example with regard to (un)desired commercialization and “selling-out” (Beal & Wilson, 2004). Hence, the very aspects that makes footbag innovative compared to other sports is also a contested topic in the footbag community, where some seek to transform footbag to something that is similar to other competitive and organized sports. From a social innovation perspective (Murray, Caulier-Grice, & Mulgan, 2010), if such a transformation takes place in the practice and organization of footbag, the footbag community might lose individuals that are not attracted to “normal” competitive sports. With such a trajectory, footbag would also lose some of its social innovativeness. In our material, such ambiguities were mostly related to issues of regulation and organization. For several of the

180

V. LENNEIS AND A. TJØNNDAL

players footbag was a sport and a lifestyle—particularly because footbag tournaments did not fit their conception of a classical sports tournament: Why do I say it [footbag] is a sport? Because… I mean it’s a physical activity and you get tired doing it and you need to practice and all that. But it’s also a lifestyle for me. For many people I feel that it’s connected with partying and smoking. And for me, I like to hang out with people and talk to people, but I don’t really like to drink much anymore and I feel that smoking and drinking influence your performance, so it’s probably not something that should be done at a sports tournament [laughs]. So I don’t really do it too often, but it’s a part of it. It’s complicated. It’s sport, but then not sport at the same time. (Kasia)

Kasia’s statement about partying at footbag events is interesting, because it summarizes some of the dilemmas and conflicts that characterize the footbag sportscape. Thorpe (2012), too, describes alcohol and drug consumption at snowboard events and argues that researchers have largely ignored recreational drug use as an aspect of lifestyle sports. Other interviewees highlighted the great freedom that footbag offered, which is something that has been described as a core characteristic of other lifestyle sports (Tomlinson et al., 2005; Wheaton, 2013). Still, Kasia and the other players expressed a wish to be recognized as athletes, which according to Dawid, quoted above, is something the International Footbag Players’ Association has successfully worked towards. In recent years, footbag tournaments have changed. Whereas footbag competitions in earlier years had been combined with concerts and had taken place from 9–10 pm at a nightclub, most of the events were now staged in a gym during the day. Likewise, the lifestyle sports literature reports great changes in terms of an establishment of codes and boundaries (Tomlinson et al., 2005)—often caused by processes of sportification (Guttmann, 2004). Unlike other lifestyle sports, these changes in footbag are not caused by increasing popularity. Despite its lack of popularity, unlike other lifestyle sports, such as skateboarding, it has‚ however‚ become increasingly regulated in terms of how competitions are organized. The Footbag Community: Anti-Mainstream? Even though the interviewees considered independence from others as an advantage, they still stressed the importance of (the community of) other

9

FOOTBAG FREESTYLE: INNOVATION IN THE ORGANIZATION …

181

footbag players. They explained that playing in a circle with others was fun, motivating and instructive, because they could inspire, challenge and advise each other: [If there is another player] I find it easier to keep going, like I find more purpose in playing, like, oh, now, there’s someone watching me, now there’s a reason that I’m doing all this stuff instead of just playing by myself. (Nathan)

Socializing with other players made footbag special and was for many interviewees a major incentive to keep playing. The players described other footbag players as exceptionally open, friendly and hospitable: Somehow, we attract awesome people. Footbag is like a filter, it just filters out stupid people and like only the cool ones get through. If you play footbag and you are kind of serious about it, more likely than not you are just gonna be a cool person. And then there’s been so many, I’m almost like tearing up right, I’ve had so many beautiful experiences within the community. (Jeremy)

The interviewees explained that in the footbag culture it was common to ‘couchsurf’ at other players’ homes when going to (smaller) tournaments and travelling—also if they had never met before. All the interviewees stated that they had made close friends due to footbag—often both at a local and international level. The metaphor of an “extended family” was frequently used when talking about the international community of footbag players, which the interviewees were very happy to be part of. International tournaments played a central role for the interviewees: it was here that footbag players from around the world gathered together, and not only to play footbag. Florian, for example, admitted that when going to a tournament “50% is about playing footbag, 50% is about meeting other people and partying.” Other researchers, too, mention that in spite of the individualistic nature of lifestyle sports, participants ascribe great importance to the community and a sense of identity and belonging (Gilchrist & Wheaton, 2017). However, in-depth accounts of the different lifestyle sports communities’ size and popularity are few and far between. The interviews suggest that the small size of the footbag community contributed to the bonding and tight-knit relations between footbag players. Although the interviewees were concerned about the falling number of footbag players

182

V. LENNEIS AND A. TJØNNDAL

in recent years, they were also convinced that it was exactly the small number of players and the uncommercialized nature of the sport that made the footbag community special. As Wesley explained: “It’s like a family-sort-of-feeling because it’s small. If it was bigger, it wouldn’t have the same feeling.” Adriana explained the differences between footbag freestyle and football freestyle, which unlike footbag is heavily commercialized and increasingly professionalized: We [footbaggers] come from the hippies. So it’s like… we have the mood of the hippies. […] I don’t know how to explain it. We are really different people, from all over the world, and it’s like, you are with your friends and you have this trust… you can go to their houses and you can party, it’s not as competitive as other sports. For example, Penske and Vasek [two world-class players], I’m sure they have no problems talking to each other. But in another sport, I’m sure that they wouldn’t do that.

In line with Adriana talking about the relationship between footbag players, many of the interviewees rejected the idea of prize money, saying that it could change players’ attitudes and the community. Kasia and several other interviewees did not want footbag to be a popular activity that, for example, was part of the Olympic Games, “because it would kill the spirit, all the fun. As I’ve said, it’s a sport, but it’s also a lifestyle and it would probably kill the lifestyle”. Resistance towards commercialization and the Olympics is often visible in other lifestyle sports, such as skateboard, that have recently been subject to sportification processes (Tjønndal et al., 2019). The rejection of prize money in footbag expresses a similar type of resistance towards organized sports. In this way, if footbag freestyle is able to remain uncommercialized and unprofessionalized, it might continue to serve as an innovative alternative to other organized sporting spaces, where competition, elite performance and talent development is often valued over social cohesion and community among players. Closely related to the interviewees’ emphasis on the benefits of a small and manageable community and the players’ resistance to traditionally organized sports is the desire to engage in a unique activity outside the mainstream. They were not only attracted to activities that were not in the spotlight, but also proud to possess a rare and particular skill. Sarah, for example, was a very good soccer player. However, she had turned down

9

FOOTBAG FREESTYLE: INNOVATION IN THE ORGANIZATION …

183

talent scouts who wanted to recruit her several times because she did not want to play in a club: That [playing association soccer] was just too stupid. That’s what everybody’s doing… that’s why I thought footbag was cool. Because that’s not what everybody’s doing. That’s something special. Something cool. Also in other aspects of life I don’t like doing what others do.

Sarah’s voice demonstrates how footbag freestyle can act as an alternative sporting space for individuals who do not find enjoyment in other, more traditionally organized sports. It might be these unique aspects of the footbag community that hold the potential for footbag freestyle to become a social innovation in sport (Tjønndal, 2018a). Likewise, some of the other interviewees emphasized that this did not only apply to footbag, but also to other areas of life—a trait that they believed was common amongst footbaggers. Villads, for example, explained that: What’s actually attractive for me is that footbag is unpopular. […] I think it’s always been that I liked things that were a bit unpopular… and liked to provoke people, by voicing my opinion. That it’s [footbag] not the most common thing, that’s probably been appealing for me. […] To deviate from the norm.

Therefore, for the interviewees, playing footbag was not only a way of socializing, having fun and doing sports, but also a way of engaging in a distinctive lifestyle outside the mainstream. In contrast to other lifestyle sports, such as snowboarding or skateboarding (Thorpe, 2011), footbag players do not wear any particular kind of clothing (apart from footbag shoes). Instead, the embodied practice of playing footbag becomes itself a marker of an alternative lifestyle to the outside world.

Conclusion: Just Another Lifestyle Sport? In this chapter, we have explored the socially innovative aspects of footbag freestyle as an uncommercialized, anti-mainstream lifestyle sport by investigating players’ understandings of footbag as an alternative to traditionally organized sports. This chapter contributes to the growing

184

V. LENNEIS AND A. TJØNNDAL

body of international literature on social innovation in sport and on alternative lifestyle sports by adding analytical perspectives on the need for alternative sporting spaces that deviate from organized sports. The interviewed players emphasized that the almost endless number of footbag tricks and combinations provided them with opportunities for creative expression. Therefore, some of the interviewees considered footbag as a form of art, drawing parallels with dancing, painting or writing. Footbag made it possible for them to reveal their feelings and personalities and develop their own unique style. Furthermore, they distinguished footbag from the rigid rules and structures of ‘traditional’ sports involving specific performance goals, coaches and other authorities. The footbag players connected responsibility for their own learning and the pace and context of this learning with freedom. Furthermore, playing footbag was not only about the activity itself, but was also about socializing, bonding and partying with other players from around the world. Although the interviewees were worried about the drop in the number of footbag players, they cherished the small size of the community, which was considered essential for the exceptional hospitality when travelling and the close relationships that developed between footbag players. Likewise, the players were proud to possess a unique skill and engage in an unpopular activity outside the mainstream. The meaning and importance the interviewees ascribed to these aspects resemble many of the characteristics of lifestyle sports that have been described in the literature (Tomlinson et al., 2005; Wheaton, 2013). However, the interviews also pointed to ambiguities and contradictions. For example, despite the interviewees clearly seeking an alternative to traditionally organized sports, they were tired of others not differentiating the casual activity of hacky sack from footbag freestyle, which they wanted to be recognized and treated as a ‘serious sport’. This is also reflected in footbag tournaments, which have become more regulated in recent years. While such sportification processes have also taken place in other lifestyle sports (e.g. in snowboarding or skateboarding), they have often been triggered by their increasing popularity, commercialization and eventually, inclusion in the Olympic programme. This is clearly not the case for footbag, which has remained small and largely uncommercialized. Herein lies the socially innovative aspect of footbag freestyle and its distinguishable feature as an anti-mainstream, unprofessionalized and uncommercialized sporting space, where social cohesion and creativity is valued above competition and sporting performance. Additionally,

9

FOOTBAG FREESTYLE: INNOVATION IN THE ORGANIZATION …

185

footbag can be described as a social innovation in sport because it represents a sporting activity that attracts individuals who do not wish to engage in traditionally organized sport. In doing so, footbag freestyle contributes to social inclusion in sport by being an alternative to both traditionally organized and mainstream, commercialized, professionalized lifestyle sports. Should footbag freestyle follow the same developmental trajectory as other lifestyle sports such as skateboarding, snowboarding or rock climbing, footbag risks to lose these defining features that make it socially innovative and become just another commercialized lifestyle sport.

Notes 1. Shuttlecock (jianzi) is a traditional activity in China, where players seek to keep the shuttlecock (featherball) in the air without using their hands. Sepak takraw is a sport played with a rattan ball over a badminton-high net. Only the feet, knees, chest and head are allowed to touch the ball. Chinlone is the traditional, national sport of Burma. Also played with a rattan ball and without using hands, chinlone is a non-competitive activity, where a group of people pass the ball between each other in a circle. 2. For those who are not familiar with ‘footbag freestyle’, see, for example, the following video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ui3qiH7fAEI— the trailer of the World Footbag Championships 2009 in Berlin, Germany. 3. https://www.footbag.org is the website of the International Footbag Players’ Association, a US non-profit corporation “dedicated to the growth of footbag play world-wide as lifetime recreation and as an amateur, competitive sport”. 4. The Facebook group ‘Freestyle Footbaggers’ has currently around 2,300 members (see https://www.facebook.com/groups/footbag/?fref=ts). 5. The German branch of ‘planetfootbag’ was founded in 1999, whereas an Austrian, Swiss and Czech equivalent followed a couple of years later. See https://www.planetfootbag.com/. 6. The term ‘lifestyle sports’ was coined by Wheaton (2005), whose extensive research on windsurfing showed that many windsurfers preferred to describe their activity as a lifestyle rather than a sport. Participants strove for a distinctive lifestyle that provided them with a specific and exclusive social identity (see also Tomlinson et al., 2005). 7. ‘Sportification’ refers to processes which by means of standardization, regulation, organization and institutionalization turn a play-like activity into a modern, rationalized sport (see also Wheaton, 2013).

186

V. LENNEIS AND A. TJØNNDAL

References Atencio, M., Beal, B., & Wilson, C. (2009). The distinction of risk: Urban skateboarding, street habitus and the construction of hierarchical gender relations. Qualitative Research in Sport and Exercise, 1(1), 3–20. https://doi.org/10. 1080/19398440802567907. Beal, B., Atencio, M., Wright, E. M., & McClain, Z. (2017). Skateboarding, community and urban politics: Shifting practices and challenges. International Journal of Sport Policy, 9(1), 11–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/19406940. 2016.1220406. Beal, B., & Wilson, C. (2004). “Chicks dig scars”: Commercialisation and the transformations of skateboarders’ identities. Understanding lifestyle sport: Consumption, identity and difference (pp. 31–54). https://doi.org/10.4324/ 9780203646069. Bignold, W. J. (2013). Developing school students’ identity and engagement through lifestyle sports: A case study of unicycling. Sport, Education and Society, 18(2), 184–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2011.558570. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77– 101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589–597. https://doi. org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806. Braun, V., Clarke, V., & Weate, P. (2016). Using Thematic Analysis in Sport and Exercise Research. In B. Smith & A. C. Sparkes (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of Qualitative Research in Sport and Exercise (pp. 191–205). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315762012.ch15. Brinkmann, S., & Kvale, S. (2015). Interviews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. Los Angeles: Sage. Clegg, J. L., & Butryn, T. M. (2012). An existential phenomenological examination of parkour and freerunning. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 4(3), 320–340. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2012.693527. Crocket, H. (2013). “This is men’s ultimate”: (Re)creating multiple masculinities in elite open Ultimate Frisbee. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 48(3), 318–333. https://doi.org/10.1177/1012690211435185. Edwards, B., & Corte, U. (2010). Commercialization and lifestyle sport: Lessons from 20 years of freestyle BMX in “Pro-Town, USA.” Sport in Society, 13(7), 1135–1151. https://doi.org/10.1080/17430431003780070. Gilchrist, P., & Wheaton, B. (2017). The social benefits of informal and lifestyle sports: A research agenda. International Journal of Sport Policy, 9(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/19406940.2017.1293132. Guttmann, A. (2004). From ritual to record: The nature of modern sports. Columbia University Press.

9

FOOTBAG FREESTYLE: INNOVATION IN THE ORGANIZATION …

187

Hienerth, C. (2006). The commercialization of user innovations: The development of the rodeo kayak industry. R and D Management, 36(3), 273–294. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.2006.00430.x. Hienerth, C., Von Hippel, E., & Berg Jensen, M. (2014). User community vs. producer innovation development efficiency: A first empirical study. Research Policy, 43(1), 190–201. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol. 2013.07.010 Kvale, S. (2007). Doing interviews. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications. Murray, R., Caulier-Grice, J., & Mulgan, G. (2010). The open book of social innovation. Retrieved from https://youngfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/ 2012/10/The-Open-Book-of-Social-Innovationg.pdf Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks California: SAGE Publications. Ratten, V. (2019). Social innovation in sport: The creation of Santa Cruz as a world surfing reserve. International Journal of Innovation Science, 11(1), 20–30. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJIS-12-2017-0135. Rinehart, R. (2000). Arriving sport: Alternatives to formal sports. In J. Coakley & E. Dunning (Eds.), Handbook of Sport Studies (pp. 504–519). London: SAGE. Säfvenbom, R., Wheaton, B., & Agans, J. P. (2018). ‘How can you enjoy sports if you are under control by others?’ Self-organized lifestyle sports and youth development. Sport in Society, 0437 (May), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 17430437.2018.1472242. Thorpe, H. (2011). Snowboarding bodies in theory and practice (Palgrave Macmillan, Ed.). Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire. Thorpe, H. (2012). “Sex, drugs and snowboarding”: (il)legitimate definitions of taste and lifestyle in a physical youth culture. Leisure Studies, 31(1), 33–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/02614367.2011.596556. Thorpe, H., & Dumont, G. (2018). The professionalization of action sports: Mapping trends and future directions. Sport in Society, 0437, 1–16. https:// doi.org/10.1080/17430437.2018.1440715. Thorpe, H., & Wheaton, B. (2011). “generation x games”, action sports and the olympic movement: Understanding the cultural politics of incorporation. Sociology, 45(5), 830–847. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038511413427. Tjønndal, A. (2018). Jenter på brett—Jenteskate som endringsprosess og alternativ til organisert. Norwegian Journal of Youth Research, 18(2), 76–106. Tjønndal, A. (2018). Sport innovation: Developing a typology. European Journal for Sport and Society, 14(4), 291–310. https://doi.org/10.1080/16138171. 2017.1421504. Tjønndal, A., Hjelseth, A., & Lenneis, V. (2019). Fra presentasjon til prestasjon? Sportifisering av skateboard i Norge [From self-expression to competition?

188

V. LENNEIS AND A. TJØNNDAL

The Sportification of Norwegian Skateboarding]. Scandinavian Sport Studies Forum. Tjønndal, A., & Nilssen, M. (2019). Innovative sport and leisure approaches to quality of life in the smart city. World Leisure Journal, 61(3), 228–240. https://doi.org/10.1080/16078055.2019.1639922. Tomlinson, A., Ravenscroft, N., Wheaton, B., & Gilchrist, P. (2005). Lifestyle sports and national sport policy : An agenda for research. Sport England, (March), 1–58. Turner, D. (2013). The civilized skateboarder and the sports funding hegemony: A case study of alternative sport. Sport in Society. Taylor & Francis. https:// doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/17430437.2013.821256 Undlien, R. (2019). Lasting social value or a one-off? People with intellectual disabilities’ experiences with volunteering for the Youth Olympic Games. Journal of Sport for Development, 7 (13), 33–45. Retrieved from www.jsfd.org Van Bottenburg, M., & Salome, L. (2010). The indoorisation of outdoor sports: An exploration of the rise of lifestyle sports in artificial settings. Leisure studies, 29(2), 143–160. Wheaton, B. (2005). Understanding lifestyle sports: Consumption, identity and difference. London: Routledge. Wheaton, B. (2013). The cultural politics of lifestyle sports. New York: Routledge.

CHAPTER 10

Social Innovation and Fitness Sports: A Case of the CrossFit Movement in North America Christina Gipson, Hannah Bennett, Nancy Malcom, and Alexandra Trahan

Introduction Imagine being in a space in which everyone’s physical accomplishments are celebrated. A place where a group of people is made up of former athletes, people who have never worked out, stay-at-home parents, secondary school and university students, professors and teachers, grandparents and service men and women. All these people are sweating

C. Gipson (B) · N. Malcom Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, GA, USA e-mail: [email protected] N. Malcom e-mail: [email protected] H. Bennett Augusta University, Augusta, GA, USA e-mail: [email protected] A. Trahan Street Parking, Vancouver, WA, USA © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 A. Tjønndal (ed.), Social Innovation in Sport, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63765-1_10

189

190

C. GIPSON ET AL.

together, doing the same or similar workouts and cheering for and encouraging each other. The group becomes accustomed to loud music shaking the walls and floors of old storage buildings, storefronts or temperature controlled open spaces. The people within the setting learn that they do not need fitness machines and instead regard their own bodies as machines that strengthen their abilities to perform daily activities. People are taught how to chase their own elite fitness and achieve their own optimal health. This is how CrossFit is typically practised in 2019. The CrossFit philosophy is innovative as it details new ways to practise, teach, and perform a sport and fitness activity. This new sport has evolved over time to meet changing needs of various cultures and groups. First, the innovation of this new sport started with Greg Glassman’s introduction of CrossFit at a time when he recognized unprecedented high rates of chronic, preventable diseases, and through CrossFit, he created what he refers to as an “elegant solution to the world’s most vexing problem” (Glassman, 2017, p. 1). Pairing functional fitness with CrossFit’s nutrition guidelines is understood to be the best way of warding off the development of chronic diseases (Level 1 Training Guide, 2018, p. 47). CrossFit participants are encouraged to forge their own personal elite fitness which includes monitoring their food intake, sleep, stress levels and workouts. Glassman uses CrossFit to illustrate Harrison and colleagues’ (2011) argument of social innovation that empowers others in the development and implementation of knowledge. Second, the CrossFit philosophy is inherently innovative as it moves beyond traditional sport to encourage participants to strive to reach their optimal health, which is done by constantly varied workouts of a high intensity that are completed in a communal setting (Glassman, 2002, 2017). This is achievable for all participants because the fitness programme is rooted in being “broad, general, and inclusive” (Glassman, 2007, p. 1). The model aims to develop participants in three different training modalities: gymnastics, weightlifting and metabolic conditioning, which means CrossFit participants do not train for a specific sport or task. According to Bock (2016), social innovation warrants social inclusion and equality. CrossFit aims to be inclusive and equal by encouraging all types of people to work out in the same environment and providing modifications for athletes to achieve the same stimulus. Additionally, CrossFit does not specialize or focus on one type of athlete. Third, CrossFit highlights functionality of daily movements (e.g. by using fitness movements that build muscle

10

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND FITNESS SPORTS …

191

groups involved in everyday actions, such as sitting, reaching overhead, or picking up heavy objects from the ground). Although participants are focusing on getting stronger and faster in workouts, the CrossFit philosophy argues that with consistent training, participants’ will increase their physical longevity. The purpose of this chapter is to highlight the ways in which CrossFit represents social, community-based, and commercial innovation in sport (Tjønndal, 2017). The chapter starts by examining how the unique culture of CrossFit promotes social innovation by attracting individuals from diverse backgrounds to the sport. One way that social innovation is achieved is through an emphasis on the development of strong community bonds, in which CrossFit athletes form tightly knit and highly supportive communities. This emphasis on strong community bonds is combined with its promotion of social responsibility at the local, national, and global levels, revealing CrossFit’s embrace of community-based innovation. The chapter then discusses how CrossFit’s commercial success is built on its philosophy of social innovation. Using an open source model which values the co-production of knowledge to spread the philosophy of CrossFit and gain new adherents, CrossFit’s digital presence helped to accelerate the global spread of this sport through the opening of individual CrossFit affiliates around the world. Consequently, CrossFit’s commercial success paved the way for the CrossFit Games to emerge as an elite sporting event, but also led to a renewed focus on the importance of ensuring that the sport of CrossFit remain accessible to everyone, such that it does not become perceived as a sporting activity for elite athletes only.

Social Innovation: Promoting a Philosophy of Elite Sport for All Distinctive Subculture One way CrossFit is innovative is through its distinctive subculture; something that helps to create strong social bonds between members. Scholars like Thorpe and Wheaton (2013) and Wooden and Blazak (2001) have examined subcultures of sports that challenge dominant cultures. The scholars highlight aspects of symbolic practices like music, language and dress as well as physical practices such as embracing individual and group

192

C. GIPSON ET AL.

expression (Beal, 1995). One thing that separates CrossFitters from nonCrossFitters is the language (Dawson, 2017). For example, regardless of whether they participate in official competitions or not, CrossFit uses the term ‘athlete’ to refer to anyone who engages in CrossFit workouts, because the term supports the philosophy of participants building their own personal elite. Further, a conversation with a CrossFitter is likely to involve a discussion about the WOD (Workout of the Day) and might include details such as whether the individual RX’d (completed the workout as prescribed) or scaled (made adjustments to the prescribed workout). Every WOD has specific combinations of exercises and in order to understand the WOD, a person has to understand the language (Belger, 2012). This shared language, in turn, strengthens people’s shared experiences within workouts (Dawson, 2017). Developed as an alternative to traditional fitness centres, CrossFit rejects the word “gym” and instead uses the term “box” to refer to the space in which the workouts take place. Box owners have the autonomy to develop their own gym philosophies and box cultures. Rather than being a trademarked or franchised business, the CrossFit model offers licences to people owning a CrossFit affiliate (Washington & Economides, 2016). CrossFit does not regulate affiliate locations within a territory or region, but instead uses a free market system that allows multiple boxes to be placed in the same area. There are no strict standards for CrossFit boxes. For example, some facilities are in garages or old warehouses, while others are in strip malls or store fronts. CrossFit boxes tend to have a ‘Spartan look’, which is often due to their limited overheads, as there are rarely mirrors, heating or air conditioning units or weightlifting machines (Dawson, 2017; Gipson, Sato, & Burdette, 2018). This setting supports the CrossFit philosophy, with adherents advocating that instead of mirrors, trainers give verbal, tactile and visual feedback to athletes. Weightlifting machines are frowned on because they eliminate the need for skills development and the universal motor recruitment patterns needed for real-life situations, thus undermining the development of ‘functional fitness’ (Herz, 2014). Murphy (2012) even argues that due to the noisy nature of CrossFit workouts (e.g. loud music and the dropping of weights) and athletes needing to be able to adapt to all climates, CrossFit facilities are commonly in industrial areas. Most CrossFit boxes closely adhere to Glassman’s philosophy and have a recognizable ‘CrossFit culture’.

10

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND FITNESS SPORTS …

193

CrossFit Athletes and the Community The path to joining CrossFit varies, there is no common age for starting CrossFit, and CrossFit athletes represent a wide variety of personality types and characteristics. Murphy (2012) highlighted stories about how and why people found CrossFit, such as the fitness enthusiast learning about CrossFit from the internet, the overweight diabetic person looking for a way to combat illness, the marathoner sidelined by injury, the busy person who only has one hour a day to exercise, athletes who want to supplement their other activities to increase strength, or the person who followed friends into the box to try it out. As the CrossFit workouts include a variety of modifications that allow participants of widely disparate strength and fitness levels to get the same stimulus and work at the intended intensity level, CrossFit is accessible to everyone. Such social inclusion allows CrossFit to highlight daily occurrences of people who have never before worked out next to former collegiate athletes and elitelevel competitors. Although CrossFitters come to the box for different reasons, they often share a willingness to adopt the CrossFit lifestyle (combining exercise, diet, support and self-care outside of the box) in order to improve themselves (Belger, 2012; Dawson, 2017; Herz, 2014; Murphy 2012). When CrossFit members buy into the CrossFit lifestyle and community, they are also buying into and cultivating new social identities, roles and statuses. It is for this reason that Dawson (2017) points to the CrossFit box as a space for self-transformation. Participating in CrossFit is more than simply joining a gym. The reality is that CrossFit does promote a lifestyle in which participants are encouraged to change many aspects of their lives—being mindful of their eating and sleeping habits as well as their psychological and physical well-being. CrossFit can therefore be classified as what Wheaton (2010) refers to as a lifestyle sport, in that the characteristics go beyond simply being rule-bound, competitive and regulated by western norms of achievement. At a time when many western sports are seen to overshadow other aspects of daily life, this emphasis on improving quality of life for all participants further highlights the social innovation that CrossFit represents. CrossFit founder Glassman had a deep understanding that sport is “a social institution that offers a collective social experience” (Warner, Kerwin, & Walker, 2013, p. 350). Therefore, in creating CrossFit, Glassman was intentional in constructing a fitness experience that promoted an ethic of community. By constructing the sport of CrossFit

194

C. GIPSON ET AL.

in this way, Glassman blurred the boundaries between organized sport, with its emphasis on formal rules, legislative bodies and regulated action to show skills (Coakley, 2017), and commercial fitness with its emphasis on health and beauty (Andreasson & Johansson, 2014). Even though CrossFit competitions mirror traditional sport, membership in a CrossFit box is voluntary and participants can come and go as they please, just as members of a traditional fitness club do (Dawson, 2017). This team-like social innovation occurs at an individual level within a CrossFit box. Even though individual athletes join CrossFit for different reasons, the culture of total commitment and emphasis on change of lifestyle within the CrossFit community bonds members together, thereby helping them to forge a unique culture that promotes a strong sense of belonging (Pickett, Goldsmith, Damon, & Walker, 2016). CrossFit classes are held in group settings where everyone does the same workout at the same time, with some individuals modifying movements as needed. Although individual athletes have different goals, working out alongside others is motivating. The sense of community is further enhanced when the athletes share experiences of suffering through difficult workouts (Dawson, 2017). One mark of these strong social bonds is evidenced in the CrossFit ethos of showing support for each other. Within the box setting, athletes are expected to cheer for each other, offering encouragement and motivation. It is not uncommon to hear people say that the loudest cheers are for the last person to finish the workout. In most CrossFit boxes, it is expected that athletes will know each other’s names. This is different from membership at a traditional gym and is rather more consistent with sport team settings. While social bonds are forged during workouts, the CrossFit community extends beyond the workout sessions. The idea that CrossFit members do not only belong to their box, but also to each other, is illustrated when CrossFit boxes host fundraising events for members who are struggling financially, for example when battling health related issues, unanticipated natural disasters or personal perils to property become major life changing events (Belger, 2012; Murphy, 2012). This strong sense of community is also evident when members help each other during stressful life events, such as caring for ageing parents or balancing life with a newborn baby by assisting with meals.

10

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND FITNESS SPORTS …

195

Community-Based Innovation: Promoting Social Responsibility and Community Partnerships These community-bonds extend beyond individual boxes and involve social responsibility to partner with local and national organizations. The CrossFit philosophy encourages individual boxes to support the communities in which they are located, and many affiliates developed programmes that use CrossFit as a vehicle to provide opportunities for underserved populations (Gipson, Campbell, & Malcom, 2018). For example, in 2008 a CrossFit affiliate in Camden, New Jersey, developed Steve’s Club, a CrossFit programme for at-risk youth (Koslap, 2014). In the intervening years, Steve’s Club has expanded its mission to help other programmes develop similar opportunities for youth, so that the Steve’s Club mission is now to “provide a national network of programs through which at-risk or underserved youth of any socioeconomic background can join the CrossFit community at a reduced, low or no-cost structure” (Youth Development Steve’s Club National Program, 2019). Additionally, nonSteve’s Club affiliates have used similar models to develop programmes for underserved youth that intertwine the CrossFit philosophy with other parts of young people’s lives, such as working with children on probation in the Building Bridges programme1 (“We help youth find success”, ND), developing social and emotional learning skills through the Boro Prepared for Anything programme2 (“Tackling Challenges Together”, ND), offering multiple types of opportunities such as competitive Olympic weightlifting and general CrossFit through Performance Initiatives3 (Performance Initiatives, LLC, 2019) and the interconnection of faith and fitness through Thrive3604 (“Thrive360,” 2018). Similarly, many CrossFit affiliates sponsor programmes that promote awareness of important social issues, such as addiction. SobrietyWOD is a programme that is offered at the local and regional level, its mission being to use the unconventional approach of pairing functional fitness with principles learned in 12-Step fellowships to help participants reach total recovery (“Recovery based fitness,” 2017). The Phoenix programme, which has reached over 26,000 people since 2006, utilizes platforms of CrossFit, climbing, hiking, running, camping, skiing, strength training and yoga to help recovering addicts turn their lives around (“The Phoenix,” 2017). Through these programmes, the negative stigma surrounding addiction and recovery can be shattered and instead participants can develop their new sober identities in a setting that merges fitness with community.

196

C. GIPSON ET AL.

For many CrossFit affiliates, the idea of supporting each other extends beyond the local community. Individual CrossFit affiliates have assisted each other despite geographic distance, thereby promoting a sense of global belonging. In this chapter we recognize three programmes, although others also use CrossFit workouts, events and apparel to help communities in need. First, the CrossFit Foundation promotes CrossFit for Hope, an organization that raises money for Kenyan villages in order to provide funds for latrines, rainwater collection systems and schools (Cooper, 2013). Individual CrossFit boxes can help to raise money for the cause by hosting a fundraiser at their box where participants complete the Hope WOD. Second, a company called LIVE2540, formally known as Orphan Aid, Liberia, sells shirts to the CrossFit community in an effort to “rebuild these children—physically, mentally, spiritually—and this is a big part of the physical rebuild as we’re able to feed them nutritious foods and … we’re able to show them how to exercise” (Roberts, 2013, p. 1). Third, a programme that has grown within the CrossFit community is Barbell for Boobs. Achauer (2011) reported that in 2011, 400 affiliates from five countries helped to raise over $300,000 for breast cancer screening through this programme. The non-profit organization has since grown and in 2017 the organization reported raising $1.89 M in 18 US states and 160 countries. This organisation is now seen as a trusted resource for fitness and breast cancer communities and serves as a resource for breast cancer survivors and those who have been diagnosed with breast cancer.

Commercial Innovation: Promoting CrossFit as ‘the Sport of Fitness’ While its culture of strong community bonds, sense of belonging, and social responsibility have helped CrossFit achieve commercial success, its spread across the globe is also the result, at least in part, to its online presence. Although the exact number of CrossFit boxes at any given time is difficult to ascertain, it is possible to use information from popular press articles, news reports, websites and peer-reviewed scholarship to track the spread of CrossFit affiliates world-wide. In 2005, only five years after the first CrossFit box opened, eighteen gyms were affiliated with CrossFit (DePrimio 2015). In 2010 it was estimated that there were roughly 1,700 affiliates across the globe (Paine, Uptgraft, & Wylie, 2010). Two years later, in 2012, the number of affiliates had more than doubled, to an estimated 3,500 boxes (Davies, Coleman, &

10

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND FITNESS SPORTS …

197

Babkes Stellino, 2016). By 2014, after only two more years, the number of affiliates had more than doubled once again, this time to an estimated 10,000 (Dawson, 2017; Rasczyk & Stephens, 2015). As of 2018, estimates suggest that there are around 13,000 CrossFit boxes spread across the world (Simpson, Prewitt-White, Feito, Giusti, & Shuda, 2017; Fusco, 2017; Choy, 2018). Glassman intentionally adopted the open source fitness model to encourage people to share their knowledge of the sport, which in turn promoted the development of a community through the World Wide Web. As Glassman explained “Our charter is open source, making co-developers out of participating coaches, athletes, and trainers through a spontaneous and collaborative online community. CrossFit is empirically driven, clinically tested, and community developed” (Glassman, 2007, p. 2). This approach to sharing the sport of CrossFit with as many people as possible by making it accessible through the internet and creating a space for the co-production of knowledge represents significant social innovation. With the growth and popularity of social media, CrossFit athletes have used online platforms to celebrate, educate and build community outside the box (Heywood, 2015; Vaterlaus, Patten, Roche, & Young, 2015). In this way, digital media offers participants access to the sport of CrossFit through virtual communities, where the ethic of support and tight-knit community bonds are often felt just as strongly as they are in the box. While working out in the box, CrossFitters offer mutual support and cheer each other on. Afterward, these same athletes can share their achievements by posting results or videos of their efforts on social media platforms. Consequently, this promotes interaction with the CrossFit community and creates more space for discussions about workouts, advice to advance movements or strategy, or simply providing each other with encouraging words following accomplishments (Mitchell, Gipson, Hauff, Malcom, & Bennett, 2018). Glassman’s reliance on the open source fitness model not only led to social innovation, but also allowed CrossFit to achieve commercial innovation. While the original CrossFit website was launched in 2001 to enable Glassman’s clients to post, access and share their workout scores and to assist clients when they were travelling or working on technique on their own by making instructional videos available (Belger, 2012), the site quickly grew and spread beyond Glassman’s personal clients (Herz, 2014). This novel way of using digital technology provided the starting point for the creation of the open source fitness movement, which led

198

C. GIPSON ET AL.

directly to the rapid growth of CrossFit. The open source developmental model is well-known within the computer-engineering industry (Raymond, 1999). Open source settings offer a space for people with similar interests to collaborate on a project. For example, the Linux operating system spread and developed through the open source model. Mulvaney (2005) compares the Linux developmental model with the CrossFit developmental model, showing how both use an open-source approach to market and promote their products (see Table 10.1). Once CrossFit established its online presence, there was no looking back. Nearly twenty years since it was first developed, CrossFit continues to share information and connect people online. Additionally, with the growth of fitness websites and mobile applications (apps), CrossFit’s connectivity continues to expand. A variety of fitness apps are specifically designed for CrossFit, such as Wodify and Beyond the Whiteboard, to help athletes track their workouts and progress. Some 3,000 CrossFit affiliates have memberships with Wodify. CrossFit athletes in these affiliate boxes can track their strength, gymnastic and aerobic progress, while the affiliate owners can track attendance, class popularity and number of personal records in the box, among other trends. In May 2018, CrossFit, Inc. signed an exclusive 19-month agreement with Beyond the Whiteboard to help track workouts and other fitness results. Box affiliates can also use this app in a similar way as Wodify to track results and monitor what is happening within the box. Both apps can be used internationally, Table 10.1 The integration of the Linux Development Model and the CrossFit Development Model Linux development model

CrossFit development model

Release information early and often

Information is released daily via CrossFit Journal, blogs, on the website, update videos on YouTube, through social media Meet the experts from the realms of climbing, swimming, gymnastics, fighting, etc. Numerous workshops are offered where training manuals are free online. Experts’ contact information is available online and social media profile pages are accessible. Read the WOD blog Check out the discussion boards See photos of athletes working out hard

Delegate everything you can

Be open to the point of promiscuity

10

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND FITNESS SPORTS …

199

although currently there is no data available to show the number of individual users or demographics. In addition to these mobile apps, CrossFit, Inc. maintains a prominent online presence through the CrossFit Journal (https://journal.crossfit.com/), which can also be viewed through an app. The journal carries stories about participants, information about trainer certifications and programming, resources such as videos and tutorials, research reports, training tips and general announcements of interest to the CrossFit community. Although CrossFit is rightly seen as a fitness movement, founder Greg Glassman has explicitly and boldly proclaimed CrossFit to be the sport of fitness (Glassman, 2010). According to Glassman, CrossFit is revolutionary in that it is ‘the’ sport to contest overall fitness levels. The detailed record-keeping that is distinctive of CrossFit does serve the purpose of motivating individual athletes to improve their own performance, but it also enables CrossFitters to compete against each other (Fisher, Sales, Carlson, & Steele 2016). Such competitions have grown in popularity over the years, helping CrossFit to spread its brand and even attract a spectator following. While the first three years of the CrossFit Games were held at The Ranch in Aromas, California, due to rapid growth of participants and fans, the event had to move to a larger venue to hold both athletes and spectators. Today, the sport of CrossFit is more popular than ever, with the CrossFit Games broadcast live on ESPN3 and Reebok signing a 10-year title sponsorship deal in 2010 with CrossFit for a price tag of $2 million (Cruz, 2013; Rische, 2011). Along with rapid growth in participation and competition, the sport of CrossFit saw changes in its organization and implementation of new rules for competition. Over the years, many of the changes were introduced as a way of maintaining the popularity of the sport. By 2019, however, new rules that governed how athletes qualified for competition led many CrossFit enthusiasts to recognize that the sport was making an intentional shift away from its emphasis on competition. After years of increased growth of the CrossFit Games, Glassman became concerned that even though an increased focus on elite competition provided short-term benefits by attracting more attention to the sport, it might also introduce long-term consequences of leading people to believe that CrossFit was a sport designed only for the most elite athletes. With CrossFit marketing itself as a programme for all, a continued spotlight on the CrossFit Games and those elite athletes could arguably send a less inclusive message to those considering joining a local box. By deemphasizing the Games,

200

C. GIPSON ET AL.

Glassman hopes that the changes will aid the continued growth of affiliates, refocus athletes’ goals to reaching their optimal health, and steward CrossFit’s longevity. With this approach, we see that CrossFit’s social innovation, and its aim to grow the sport and make it widely available to everyone, also represents commercial innovation, where a fitness sport that is widely available to everyone is also best poised to achieve commercial success.

Conclusion When CrossFit emerged in 2001 it exploded in the United States and is now continuing to grow around the world. According to Henderson (2018) and Waters (2017), CrossFit is the largest fitness chain and competes with some of the largest and fastest-growing corporate chains like Subway, McDonalds and Starbucks. Such rapid commercial growth and popularity are linked to the various aspects of social innovation represented within CrossFit. Throughout this chapter, we highlighted ways in which CrossFit is socially innovative as it was designed to promote functional fitness that was accessible for everyone, in order to counter high rates of chronic illness. The CrossFit philosophy aims to be inclusive by providing modifications for various movements during workouts and providing online access to instructions, movements, and workouts through an open source approach. The CrossFit philosophy encourages athletes to strive to reach their optimal health by incorporating healthy habits of eating, sleeping and training. The goal of optimal health and longevity is a changed mind set for most athletes who are often pushed to focus on winning. Lastly, CrossFit is socially innovative as it is practised within a distinctive subculture that emphasises a community within one’s box as well as beyond. CrossFit has adapted to the ever-growing changes within sport and has arguably cemented itself as the leader in the open source fitness movement. With its social innovation, continued growth and development through its online presence, and its community-focused culture, CrossFit has convincingly—and sometimes controversially—left its lasting impression on the sporting world. In June 2020, in response to racial turmoil in the U.S. that followed the killing of George Floyd by on-duty police officers, CrossFit founder Greg Glassman posted a racially insensitive message to Twitter. Glassman’s tweet resulted in severe backlash, with hundreds of local CrossFit owners stating that they planned to disaffiliate from CrossFit. The authors

10

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND FITNESS SPORTS …

201

want to acknowledge that CrossFit is a brand of functional fitness. The named brand brought people together, with individual CrossFit affiliates pointing to their supportive and inclusive communities as a primary reason for the growth and popularity of CrossFit. The authors wish to acknowledge how quickly a brand can be tarnished; only time will tell how this controversy resolves. In this case, even if the CrossFit name proves to have been irreversibly damaged, the sport of CrossFit has made a lasting impact on re-shaping the landscape of the fitness industry in the pursuit of promoting functional fitness.

Notes 1. The Building Bridges programme aims to act as a “safety net” for misguided youth by intervening and redirecting their lives through services that offer discipline, structure and skills. Building Bridges has grown into a multi-faceted programme that includes work therapy groups, educational programming, recreational groups, sport teams, CrossFit, social gatherings and summer trips. The programme provides services to over 200 at-risk youth and their families each year. 2. Boro Prepared for Anything’s purpose is to educate underserved youth about healthy lifestyles addressing physical, social and personal development. The objectives of Boro Prepared for Anything are: to educate populations about the significance of academics, health and fitness, nutrition, goal setting and social awareness; to support and conduct research, education and informational activities to increase public awareness of social benefits of fitness on underserved youth; to combat delinquent behaviour within this population and to prevent community deterioration. 3. Performance Initiatives, Inc.’s purpose is to educate and mentor youth and adults mentally, physically and spiritually by using athletics and fitness, with Olympic-style weight lifting as the base. Positive character traits are nurtured in participants in the youth programmes—aimed at those who have possibly never seen hope or encouragement in their life. 4. Thrive306 teaches participants the following mindset: we pursue our mission, we prepare ourselves every day, we work hard and we don’t make excuses. The programme applies this mindset to every aspect of its programming, and challenges teens to do the same. By internalizing these values and making them second nature, Thrive360 is sowing seeds that prepare a teenager to face and overcome even the most intense challenges that life may present.

202

C. GIPSON ET AL.

References Achauer, H. (2011). It’s all for the boobs. The CrossFit Journal. Retrieved on 3 January 2019 from http://journal.crossfit.com/2011/10/its-all-for-the-boo bs.tpl. Andreasson, J., & Johansson, T. (2014). The fitness revolution. Historical transformations in the global gym and fitness culture. Sport Science Review, XXIII (3–4), 91–112. Beal, B. (1995). Disqualifying the official: An exploration of social resistance through the subculture of skateboarding. Sociology of Sport Journal, 12, 252– 267. Belger, A. W. (2012). The power of community: CrossFit and the force of human connection. Las Vegas: Victory Belt. Bock, B. B. (2016). Rural marginalization and the role of social innovation: A turn towards nexogenous development and rural reconnection. Sociologia Ruralis, 56(4), 552–573. Choy, R. Y. (2018). CrossFit Stasis at a crossroad. 2018 Vanier college BDC case challenge. Retrieved 3 January 2019 from http://www.vaniercollege.qc.ca/ business-administration/files/2018/02/crossfit-en.pdf. Coakley, J. (2017). Sport in society: Issues and controversies (12th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill Education. Cooper, C. (2013). Learning about hope. The CrossFit Journal. Retrieved on 3 January 2019 from http://journal.crossfit.com/2013/10/learning-abouthope.tpl. Cruz, J. (2013, 29 May). Adidas to make CrossFit delta logo symbol for reebok fitness. Bloomberg. Retrieved on 7 February 2019 from www.bloomberg. com/news/ar”cles/2013-05-29/adidas-to-make-crossfit-delta-logo-symbolfor-reebok-fitness. Davies, M. J., Coleman, L., & Babkes Stellino, M. (2016). The relationship between basic psychological need satisfaction, behavioral regulation, and participation in CrossFit. Journal of Sport Behavior, 39(3), 239–254. Dawson, M. C. (2017). CrossFit: Fitness cult or reinventive institution? International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 52(3), 361–379. DePrimio, Pete. (2015). The world of CrossFit. Hockessin, Delaware: Mitchell Lane. Fisher, J., Sales, A., Carlson, L., & Steele, J. (2016). A comparison of the motivational factors between CrossFit participants and other resistance exercise modalities: a pilot study. The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 9, 1227–1234. Fusco, B. R. (2017). Predicting intentions to engage in CrossFit: An application of the reasoned action model (Unpublished master’s thesis). Ball State University, Muncie, IN, USA.

10

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND FITNESS SPORTS …

203

Gipson, C., Campbell, N., & Malcom, N. (2018). Partnerships between an AtRisk Youth CrossFit program and local community organizations: Focusing on the antecedents to partnership development. Sports, 6(3), 100. Gipson, C. M., Sato, S., & Burdette, T. (2018). Assessing risk factors at local CrossFit events: from participants’ perspectives. International Journal of Hospitality and Event Management, 2(1), 1–18. Glassman, G. (2002). What is fitness? The CrossFit Journal. Retrieved 3 January 2019 from https://journal.crossfit.com/article/what-is-fitness. Glassman, G. (2007). Understanding CrossFit. The CrossFit Journal, 56(1), 1, 5. Glassman, G. (2010). Defining CrossFit. The CrossFit Journal. Retrieved 27 March 2019 from http://journal.crossfit.com/2010/12/glassmandefinin g.tpl. Glassman, G. (2017). Greg glassman: The world’s most vexing problem. The CrossFit Journal. Retrieved on 7 February 2019 from https://journal.crossfit. com/article/cfj-greg-glassman-the-world-s-most-vexing-problem. Harrison, D., Klein, J.-L., & Browne, P. L. (2011). Social innovation, social enterprise and services. In F. Gallouj & F. Djellal (Eds.), Handbook of innovation and services (pp. 197–221). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Henderson, S. (2018). CrossFit’s explosive affiliate growth by the numbers. Morning Chalk Up. Retrieved on 7 February 2019 from https://mornin gchalkup.com/2018/10/23/crossfits-explosive-affilaite-growth-by-the-num bers/. Herz, J. C. (2014). Learning to breathe fire: The rise of CrossFit and the primal future of fitness. New York: Crown Archetype. Heywood, L. (2015). The CrossFit sensorium: Visuality, affect and immersive sport. Paragraph, 38(1), 20–36. Koslap, M. (2014). Steve’s club: Bringing out the best. The CrossFit Journal. Retrieved on 3 January 2019 from http://journal.crossfit.com/2014/11/ste ves-club-camp.tpl. Level 1 Training Guide. (2018). CrossFit training. Retrieved on 3 January 2018 from http://library.crossfit.com/free/pdf/CFJ_English_Level1_Traini ngGuide.pdf. Mitchell, R., Gipson, C., Hauff, C., Malcom, N., Bennet, H. (2018, June). How do the women of CrossFit use social media? An exploratory study to examine influences and impacts. Paper presented at 2018 World Congress of Sociology of Sport, Lausanne, Switzerland. Mulvaney, B. (2005). CrossFit: An open source model. The CrossFit Journal. Retrieved on 3 January 2019 from http://library.crossfit.com/free/pdf/07_ 05_OpenSource_Mulvaney.pdf. Murphy, T. J. (2012). Inside the box: How CrossFit® shredded the rules, stripped down the gym and rebuilt my body. Boulder, CO: Velo Press.

204

C. GIPSON ET AL.

Paine, J., Uptgraft, J., & Wylie, R. (2010). CGSC CrossFit study (Special report). Fort Leavenworth, KS: Command and General Staff College. Retrieved on 7 February 2019 from http://purl.access.gpo.vob/GPO/LPS21074. Performance Initiatives, LLC. (2019). Performance initiatives, inc.: Building healthier hearts, minds, and bodies. Retrieved on 3 January 2019 from https://pifitness.org/. Pickett, A. C., Goldsmith, A., Damon, Z., & Walker, M. (2016). The influence of sense of community on the perceived value of physical activity: A cross-context analysis. Leisure sciences, 38(3), 199–214. Rasczyk, K., & Stephens, M. (2015). CrossFit community, information community: Needs and behaviors. San Jose State University. Raymond, E. (1999). The Cathedral and the Bazaar: Musings on linux and open source by an accidental revolutionary. O’Reilly, Sebastopol, CA. Recovery based fitness. (2017). Retrieved on 3 January 2019 from https://sob rietywod.org/. Rische, P. (2011). CrossFit’s relationship with Reebok enhances its financial and commercial credibility. Forbes. Retrieved on 7 February 2019 from http:// www.forbes.com/sites/sportsmoney/2011/07/22/CrossFits-relationshipwith-reebok-enhances-its-financial-and-commercial-credibility/. Roberts, D. (2013). Helping orphans in Liberia. The CrossFit Journal. Retrieved on 3 January from http://journal.crossfit.com/2013/05/helping-orphansin-liberia.tpl. Simpson, D., Prewitt-White, T.R., Feito, Y., Giusti, J., & Shuda, R. (2017). Challenge, commitment, community, and empowerment: Factors that promote the adoption of CrossFit as a training program. Sports Journal, 1–7. Tackling challenges together: Boro prepared for anything. Retrieved on 3 January 2019 from http://boropreparedforanything.org/. The Phoenix: Rise, recover, live. (2017). Retrieved on 3 January 2019 from https://thephoenix.org/. Thorpe, H. A. & Wheaton, B. (2013). Dissecting action sports studies: Past, present, and beyond. A companion to sport, 341–58. Thrive360. (2018). Retrieved on 3 January 2019 from https://www.thrive360. net/. Tjønndal, A. (2017). Sport innovation: Developing a typology. European Journal for Sport and Society, 14(4), 291–310. Vaterlaus, J. M., Patten, E. V., Roche, C., & Young, J. A. (2015). # Gettinghealthy: The perceived influence of social media on young adult health behaviors. Computers in Human Behavior, 45, 151–157. Warner, S., Kerwin, S., & Walker, M. (2013). Examining sense of community in sport: Developing the multidimensional ‘SCS’ Scale. Journal of Sport Management, 27 (5), 349–362.

10

SOCIAL INNOVATION AND FITNESS SPORTS …

205

Washington, M. S., & Economides, M. (2016). Strong is the new sexy: Women, CrossFit, and the postfeminist ideal. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 40(2), 143–161. Waters, C. (2017). F45: The fastest growing franchise you’ve never heard of. The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved on 7 February 2019 from https://www.smh.com.au/business/small-business/f45-the-fastest-gro wing-franchise-youve-never-heard-of-20170317-gv05ki.html. We help youth find success. (n.d). Retrieved on 17 February 17, 2019 from http://www.bbyouth.org/. Wheaton, B. (2010). Introducing the consumption and representation of lifestyle sports. Sport in Society, 13(7–8), 1057–1081. Wooden, W., & Blazak, R. (2001). Renegade Kids: Suburban Outlaws: From Youth Culture to Delinquency (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Youth Development Steve’s Club National Program. (2019). Retrieved on 3 January 2019 from https://www.guidestar.org/profile/27-2552989.

PART IV

Gender and Social Innovation in Sport

CHAPTER 11

The Wonderful World of Quidditch: An Innovative Model of Gender Inclusivity Jeffrey O. Segrave

Introduction As an institutionalized cultural practice, sport operates as contested terrain and an active battleground for social significance, both of which reflect and constitute issues such as social class, domination and resistance, legitimation, race and gender (Heino, 2000). By its very nature, sport is necessarily innovative because it is always subject to ongoing social, political, commercial and technological trends and developments (Tjønndal, 2017).Whenever a new sport emerges, it becomes yet another site in which important social issues are negotiated and renegotiated. As the French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu notes, “The appearance of a new sport … causes a restructuring of the space of sporting practices and a more or less redefinition of the meaning attached to various practices” (Bourdieu, 1991, p. 367). New sports are necessarily subversive and challenge the status quo; they are specifically designed to offer crucial solutions to predetermined and predefined problems within mainstream sport.

J. O. Segrave (B) Skidmore College, Saratoga Springs, NY, USA e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 A. Tjønndal (ed.), Social Innovation in Sport, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63765-1_11

209

210

J. O. SEGRAVE

Quidditch, a land-based sport derivative of the fictional sport portrayed in J. K. Rowling’s Harry Potter novels, is an interesting example of a new sport that has been specifically created to offer an alternative to one of the established dimensions of the hegemonic sport order, namely the androcentric, sex-segregated nature of contemporary sport. Like a wide variety of other alternative sports, Quidditch represents a symbolic challenge to the symbolic order in that it is anti-mainstream, an emergent assault on the established gender regime in sport that remains dominated by the gender binary and a bimodal classification that contributes to gender injustice, homophobia and transphobia (Fausto-Sterling, 2000; Travers, 2008). Quidditch structurally and ideologically problematizes the mythical relationship of sport to ideals of fairness and equity because it constitutionally and performatively confronts sexist oppression and inequality in sport. Being both new and destabilizing, Quidditch, like other alternative sports, exists on the fringes of the sport nexus (Burstyn, 1999; Heywood & Dworkin, 2003), situated somewhere between the creative, dissident aspirations of its participants and the dominant culture and values of bureaucratized and rationalized sport. In other words, like other innovative and emergent sports, Quidditch grapples with the tensions that exist between the expressive model of sport, driven by the athletes’ needs for fulfilment and expression, and spectacle sport, driven by the promise of economic and cultural status and rewards (Rinehart, 2000). The purpose of this chapter is to interrogate Quidditch as a new and emergent sport that offers an innovative alternative to the hegemonic gendered culture of mainstream sport. Specifically, I suggest that Quidditch makes the sexist and discriminating practices of sport transparent by exposing the ways in which the entrenched and taken-for-granted gender binary institutionalizes and rationalizes heteronormative male power and privilege. Furthermore, I propose that as a new sport, Quidditch displays many of the tensions and conflicts that characterize socially innovative sports, in that it seeks to maintain its gender integrity at the same time as it feels the pressures that accrue from its rapidly growing popularity and success. Ultimately, though, I wish to argue that Quidditch serves as a powerful and effective corrective that contributes to greater social justice and equality in sport. This chapter is divided into five sections. In the first section, I characterize sport as a sex-segregated institution that normalizes gender

11

THE WONDERFUL WORLD OF QUIDDITCH …

211

differences, celebrates masculinity and legitimizes male power and privilege. I then give a brief history of Quidditch and show how, in both practice and politics, Quidditch challengers the traditional two-sex system by institutionalizing gender inclusion. In the third section, I consider the research on Quidditch and how the testimonies of Quidditch athletes speak to the issue of gender inclusivity. In the fourth section, I look at the ways in which Quidditch is confronted with the consequences of its success and how its success threatens the ideological foundations on which the sport was based in the first place. I end with some concluding comments.

The Gender Binary in Mainstream Sports Despite the well-acknowledged emergence of women’s sports, gender equality has not yet been fully realized. Women are still trivialized, sexualized and under-represented in the media, excluded from decision-making positions and are subject to backlash from those who resent the incursion of women into what was once an exclusive heterosexual male preserve (Messner, 2007; O’Reilly & Cahn, 2007; Travers, 2008). One of the primary mechanisms for the oppression and marginalization of both women and the LGBTQ community in sport is the taken-for-granted naturalness of male and female categories. Even though one of the great successes of the feminist agenda has been to expose sport as a patriarchal edifice, sex segregated sport remains the hegemonic mode of sport presentation and organization; a powerful site for affirming beliefs about male-female differences, celebrating heterosexual masculinity and legitimizing male privilege and dominance (Coakley, 2017, p. 178). At a societal level, the gender binary serves as the entrenched blueprint of gender relations, the gender order in American society and the traditional binary classification in sport. What Martine Rothblatt (1995) poignantly describes as “the apartheid of sex” serves as one of the most powerful cultural practices that sustains heteronormative male social and political hegemony. In short, sport perpetuates gender injustice through the cultural and material devaluation of women and gender transgressors by celebrating hegemonic masculinity and normalizing a two sex system that reifies and institutionalizes gender inequality. Sport thus functions as a core patriarchal and masculinist institution and operates within a contested gender order, and in so doing does not simply play a reactionary and regressive role in the fortification of binary

212

J. O. SEGRAVE

gender relations. In the same way as postmodern theories of subjectivity and identity have sought to destabilize the bi-polar notion of gender by insisting on a spectrum of fluid identities, the postmodern queer and feminist deconstruction of essential gender has internally contested the world of gendered sport (Pronger, 1990; Kane, 1995). The revelation that the two sex system is ideological rather biological (Fausto-Sterling, 2000) has, in fact, nakedly exposed the role of sport as a significant factor in the cultural and economic marginalization of women and gender transgressors, both in the world of sport and beyond, and has energized women and LGBTQs to seek redress for their cultural disenfranchisement. As a result, the radically shifting opportunity structure and cultural imagery of post-Title IX sports have ushered in developing forms of sport and emerging demographics of participation and spectatorship that have challenged the once normalized beliefs about male superiority, female inferiority and the marginalization of other gendered populations. The dramatic rise in women’s sports, extreme sports, lifestyle sports, gay and lesbian community sports and a wide variety of other recreational and alternative sports has created more space for the development of an array of meanings, identities, interactions and relationships around the contested issues of gender and sexuality (Rinehart, 2005). Subversive in both nature and intent, and certainly less integrated into or dominated by what Michael Messner (2002) calls “the sport-media-commercial complex” (xx), these sports have challenged orthodox gender ideology and the constitutive heteronormative model of gender as normal and given expression to a more equitably redistributive politics of engagement. Amongst these sports is the newly emergent sport of Quidditch, which even in the enchanted world of Harry Potter abolishes the gender binary by unpretentiously assuming gender equity (Segrave, 2015), but that in its real-world form eliminates the gender binary altogether by acknowledging the multiplicity of genders that constitute the lived experience of athletes and by mandating gender inclusiveness.

The Sport of Quidditch The real-life sport of Quidditch was first adapted from J. K. Rowling’s fantasy sport by two Middlebury College students, Xander Manshel and Alex Benepe, in 2005. The first game ever to be played took place on Battell Beach at Middlebury College, Vermont, USA, in October 2005. Players turned up wearing capes fashioned from towels and one player

11

THE WONDERFUL WORLD OF QUIDDITCH …

213

even brought a lamp to ride rather than a broom! One month later, seven teams participated in an intramural tournament at Middlebury College, and, in 2006, Vassar College, New York, USA, established the second collegiate Quidditch team. In December 2006, the game was profiled in the Wall Street Journal. The first World Cup between Middlebury and Vassar was held in November 2007. By 2008, the sport had taken root in numerous campuses in the northeast and mid-Atlantic regions of the US. Featured on MTV and in USA Today, the popularity of the game surged in North America. US Quidditch (USQ) was incorporated as a non-profit corporation in March 2010. As many as 15,000 paying spectators attended World Cup IV, which was held in Manhattan in November 2010. Over 40 media outlets covered the 46 international team event over a two day period. In February 2011 Vassar College competed against the University of Vassa, Finland, in an inaugural match between transcontinental teams. Currently, Quidditch is played at over 300 universities and secondary schools and has attracted as many as 20,000 players in 40 countries around the globe, including the UK, Australia, Brazil, Uganda, China, Mexico, France, Scandinavia, Indonesia and the USA. The International Quidditch Association (IQA) was founded in 2010 and annually hosts and sanctions regional, national and global events, including the first official IQA World Cup held in 2012 in Oxford, England.1 In order to showcase the sport to as wide an audience as possible, USQ hosted an exhibition between five countries (the US, Canada, the UK, France and Australia) prior to the 2012 London Olympic Games. In the UK, the annual British Quidditch Cup is a large and prestigious tournament and attracts the 32 best teams that qualify through regional tournaments. The summer of 2017 marked the launch of the Quidditch Premier League, in which eight regional teams competed for the title of UK champions. In the USA, the most prestigious tournament is the US Quidditch Cup. Held annually since 2007, it features collegiate and community clubs.2 Major League Quidditch (MLQ), a semi-professional league, launched its inaugural season in 2015 with eight teams (JacksonGibson, 2017). As a full-contact sport, Quidditch is a creative amalgam of rugby, dodgeball and tag, with more than a hint of wrestling and lacrosse. A Quidditch team consists of seven athletes—three chasers, two beaters, one keeper and one seeker—who play with brooms between their legs at all times. The game is played on a field comparable in size to a hockey

214

J. O. SEGRAVE

pitch. Three circular goals atop pipes are placed at either end of the pitch. The chasers score goals, worth 10 points, by throwing a volleyball, called the quaffle, through the goal. They advance the ball down the field by running with it, passing it to teammates or kicking it. The beaters use dodgeballs called bludgers to disrupt the flow of the game by ‘knocking out’ other players. Players who are hit by a bludger are out of play until they touch their own goal. Each team also has a seeker who attempts to catch the snitch, a ball attached to the waistband of the snitch runner, a neutral player who uses any means possible to avoid capture. The snitch is worth 30 points and its capture ends the game. If the score is a tie when the snitch is caught the game goes into overtime (IQA Rulebook, 2018–2020).3 Beyond the rules that define the sport and the way it is played, Quidditch is also distinguished by its mandated gender inclusiveness.4 One of the IQA’s stated core values is to “promote gender equality and an inclusive environment at all levels” (2018–2020, p. 3). Consequently, the IQA Rulebook (IQA, 2018–2020) stipulates the foundational ‘four maximum rule’, which states that “there may be no more than four players of the same gender on the pitch at one time” (8) and that “the gender that a player identifies as is considered to be that player’s gender” (3). The IQA specifically embraces “players of all genders and sexualities and athletes play as their stated gender (whether cisgender or transgender, with a binary or nonbinary gender)” (3). The newly formed MLQ likewise mandates that there must be at least two female or non-binary players on the field for each team at all times. To bolster the sport’s gender inclusive goals, in 2013 USQ created Title 9 3/45 which actively promotes advocacy and awareness as well as gender equality and inclusiveness (Title 9 3/4, 2018). The intent of Quidditch’s gender inclusive rules is to ensure that teams actively work to recruit and that the fielded teams reflect diversity. Through Title 9 3/4, both USQ and IQA are proactively inclusive of transgendered athletes by using gender as opposed to sex in policy and practice. USQ acknowledges that “We understand that the process of transition is a very personal (and expensive) decision, and is influenced by many factors, none of which are, or should be, because a sport requires it” (Title 9 3/4, 2018). In short, Quidditch specifically recognizes that gender is not dichotomous, but rather that “real bodies have hundreds of continuous physical traits that vary on a scale from low to high rather than falling neatly into two separate and opposite categories” (Coakley, 2017, 171).

11

THE WONDERFUL WORLD OF QUIDDITCH …

215

Due to its overt political support of gender inclusivity, Quidditch acknowledges that sport will not become a vehicle for social equality and justice if sport leaders continue to use and defend the established gender equality paradigm. This paradigm may well advocate equal treatment for genders, as Title IX did, but actually does little to challenge the takenfor-granted assumptions that men are better athletes than women, or that sport is appropriately sex segregated. As Canadian sport sociologist Bruce Kidd puts it: “It is not enough simply to extend the programs which males have enjoyed to females” (United Nations, 2007). Rather, innovative models of sport must be conceived that allow all genders to enjoy sport together. Due to its emphasis on inclusivity, Quidditch actively seeks an alternative to the gendered construction of mainstream sport. As the IQA Rulebook (IQA, 2018–2020) avers, “many players have, for the first time, found a team sport that recognizes them as they are” (3). Grounded in gender inclusivity and a process that relies on selfidentification, Quidditch directly and profoundly challenges the biocentric model of gender that still dominates institutionalized sport; a model that in particular problematizes the participation of transsexuals and intersexed athletes who are commonly subject to discrimination and disqualification and their gendered subjectivities routinely ignored or erased (Namaste, 2000). With its stance on gender, Quidditch is considered by many to be the gold standard for breaching traditional gender stereotyping and attaining equality in sport amongst men, women and the LGBTQ community. As Huffington Post reporter Sean Pagoda (2014) writes, when it comes to gender equity in sport, “Quidditch wins”.

The Inclusive World of Quidditch Much is touted in the name of Quidditch, especially when it comes to issues of gender equality. “The physical impact of physical activity on health, self-confidence, and well-being for all genders has been proven time and again,” the IQA posits (2018–2020, p. 3). Even more definitively, Adele Jackson-Gibson (2017) claims that Quidditch “is truly changing the stereotypes that often hinder non-male athletes”. The goals for the sport are equally lofty. USQ hopes that Quidditch will be “a positive example for other sport leagues as well as a way to positively influence how players view other genders” (Title 9 3/4, 2018). Even more expansively, IQA seeks to challenge the “world’s view on gender in sports, as well as challenge professional sports leagues to modify their

216

J. O. SEGRAVE

gender rules to promote gender equality” (Richter, 2011). Or, as Pagoda (2014) proclaims, “It’s time to use Quidditch as a model for what sports should look like. When “brooms up!” is yelled by a referee, it signifies the start of a Quidditch match. Today it signifies the start of something much greater”—a challenge to the entrenched binary system upon which the edifice of modern sport is erected. In short, Quidditch is heralded by some as an effective antidote to gender discrimination and oppression in sport, an innovative model of inclusivity and diversity that seeks to proactively challenge the way transsexual, transgendered and non-binary athletes are marginalized and symbolically eradicated in the conventional sport nexus. Although limited in scope and number, and for the most part qualitative in methodology, research shows that Quidditch provides a positive coeducational sporting experience for male, female and LGBIT athletes. Similar to the findings from research on mainstream sport (FraserThomas & Côté, 2006), ethnographic research on Quidditch suggests that the sport enhances and cultivates important personal, social and career skills, including leadership skills, self-confidence and pride, communication skills, personal empowerment, teamwork skills, job opportunities and beneficial professional connections (Cohen, Melton, & Peachey, 2014; Cohen & Peachey, 2015; Segrave, 2015; Title 9 3/4, 2018). In particular, personal testimonies show that Quidditch offers a unique coeducational environment in which athletes of all genders can engage in a full contact sport (Cohen et al., 2014; Cohen & Peachey, 2015; Segrave, 2015). According to Segrave, “the physical nature of Quidditch, in particular the fact that athletes of all genders can compete together in this rough and tumble contact sport, energizes participants and serves as a salient source of physical empowerment” (2015, p. 10). The testimonies of Quidditch athletes are consistent with the findings from other studies that have revealed that participation in contact sports enhances women’s sense of physical empowerment. Jennifer Hargreaves (1997), for example, notes that female boxers “enjoy the physicality of fighting, the excitement, the roughness, and the risk” (42). Even without checking, Nancy Theberge (2000) states that female hockey players “relish the challenge of physical play and the sense of empowerment it provides” (115). Female martial artists (Lawler, 2002), boxers (Mennesson, 2000) and footballers (Miggliaccio & Berg, 2007) alike report feelings of bodily and personal empowerment and liberation as a result of the opportunity to engage in physically aggressive contact in

11

THE WONDERFUL WORLD OF QUIDDITCH …

217

activities that have traditionally been reserved for men. The testimonies of Quidditch players suggest that the same may apply to LGBIT-identified athletes. In other words, just as Martha McCaughey (1997) draws on a physical feminist perspective that frames engagement in physically aggressive activities for women as empowering, this approach also appears to work for LGBTQ athletes, in all instances potentially destabilizing the contemporary bifurcation between masculinity and femininity, heterosexuality and homosexuality. However, and perhaps even more importantly, players’ testimonies suggest that as an innovative sport Quidditch fosters a culture that contributes in powerful ways to the cause and practice of gender and social justice, or to what Nancy Fraser calls “participatory parity” (2007). These testimonies show that players benefit from the opportunity to meet, interact and compete with a diverse array of gendered peers, and that practising and taking the field with and against athletes from a broad array of sexualities enriches their personal, social and athletic experiences. Players routinely laud Quidditch for its welcoming and tolerant atmosphere and acknowledge that it normalizes relationships among genders. Quidditch also engenders respect for opposite genders, cultivates appreciation for the skills of all teammates, mitigates the physical and skill differentials between genders on the field and reduces stereotypes among male and female athletes (Cohen et al., 2014; Jackson-Gibson, 2017; Segrave, 2015). Adam Cohen, Nicole Melton and Jon Welty Peachey (2014) report that “one impact that resulted from the positive coed experience was a noticeable desire for greater levels of inclusivity and equality on the playing field” (228). Likewise, sport sociologist Jeffrey Segrave (2015) reports that participation in the sport of Quidditch strengthens and empowers LGBTQ athletes in terms of their feelings of gender security and confidence (11–12). This narrative also corresponds with reports from athletes from a variety of other sports (Ravel & Rail, 2008), which indicates that athletes of all gender identities, especially female athletes, find that an inclusive and respectful gender inclusive sport environment enhances self-confidence and feelings of safety and comfort and offers safe spaces in which individuals are free to express and explore all the different facets of their unconventional sexualities. Segrave (2015) also reports that in some circumstances the personal, physical and gender empowerment cultivated in the Quidditch environment may translate into a more proactive disposition towards coming out and even towards adopting a more proactive social activist stance (12).

218

J. O. SEGRAVE

As Segrave suggests, the structure of Quidditch would appear to have encouraged Quidditch players to become more confident with their identities and provided them with a safe social space in which they can come out for the first time and where (of even greater social significance) they can develop a sense of social activism, perhaps even an action agenda, if only at a team level, that can challenge gender biocentricity and enhance diversity and inclusiveness in sport (12). Todd Miggliaccio and Ellen Berg (2007) document a similar sense of empowerment amongst female footballers, who report that their participation in a physical sport like football and the support they received from teammates “eased things somewhat” (277) in terms of coming out and encouraging social activism. Collectively, these testimonies demonstrate how interactions with a broad cross-section of genders in sport can impact the lives of non-cis individuals and reinforce what Barbara Ravel and Genviève Rail (2008) identify as “the importance of openness toward nonconventional sexualities in sport and feelings of being at ease in the sport space for facilitating the coming out process and the expression of one’s sexual identity” (7). Finally, it is important to recognize that many of the claims made on behalf of Quidditch rest on assumptions that are subject to a postmodernist critique, including the beliefs that coming out leads to the development of a positive sexual/gender identity, which may not always be the case (Iannotta & Kane, 2002), that no complicated cultural politics is associated with coming out, when there clearly is (Chawansky & Francombe, 2011), and that sexual identities are fixed, stable and unchanging, which postmodernists would argue they are not. Postmodernism favours the idea of decentring the subject and posits the fluidity and fragmentation of subjectivity (Weedon, 1999). Queer theory also questions the essentialist nature of concepts such as sex, gender and sexuality (Butler, 1993) and, likewise, aims at destabilizing gender categories and advocates that stipulated genders, especially the two poles of the binary, be replaced by “a proliferation of the differences that queer theory and politics refuse to hierarchize” (Weedon, 1999, p. 73). K. L. Broad (2001), for example, has shown how women rugby players challenge the idea of fixed categories of sexuality by exposing the existence of multiple and fluid sexualities. Likewise, in their study of Francophone sportswomen, Ravel and Rail (2008) found that “sexuality was not fixed because subjects

11

THE WONDERFUL WORLD OF QUIDDITCH …

219

positioned themselves differently depending on sociocultural and discursive circumstances” (21). In each case, the multiplicity and fluidity of sexualities challenges the entrenched heterosexual/homosexual binary. While the extant qualitative data does not validate or refute the nuances in these perspectives, it does suggest that the development of a complex plurality of conventional and nonconventional sexualities in the culture of Quidditch points to the attenuation of what Margaret Duncan and Michael Messner (1998) call “asymmetrical gender markers” (180), at the same time as it signifies the development of progressive gender relations that might be symbolic of an impending new gender order. Precisely because of its dedicated gender inclusive stance, Quidditch challenges the ‘normalness’ and ‘naturalness’ of the masculine/feminine and heterosexual/homosexual divide and, instead, offers the opportunity to envision and promote a gender order in sport that does not rely on traditional gender hegemonic conceptions and practices (Segrave, 2015, 2016).

Trouble in Paradise: The Dynamics of Innovation All sports are subject to change. Buffeted by commercial, technological, medical, political and social developments and transformations, even the most well established sports are forced to adapt and evolve and consider changes to rules and regulations, form and format, performance and presentation. In other words, innovation in sport is not something new (Tjønndal, 2017). However, socially innovative sports, especially successful ones like Quidditch, are subject to even greater cultural pressures as they seek to confront the conflicts and controversies that inevitably derive from a dynamic new sport form that challenges the status quo. Robert Rinehart (2000) identifies the polemics that contextualize the emergence of alternative sports as follows: the incorporation of grassroots practitioners into the mainstream; the outsider/insider status of athletes; the professional/amateur standing of athletes; the purity, authenticity and genuineness of the sport; multinational corporate sponsorship and globalization/Americanization arguments; the philosophies behind the sports with regard to lifestyle, aesthetics and competition; self-regulation versus governance by others and sexism, racism and homophobia (510). For the most part, these contentious issues pit the authentic needs of a grassroots and often subversive, if not dissident, participant base against the coercive and hegemonic practices of dominant social

220

J. O. SEGRAVE

institutions, primarily, of course, the media and corporate interests. Rinehart summarizes the questions that face socially innovative sports forms as follows: How might they establish credibility and gain regional, national and worldwide acceptance? How might they retain their cutting-edge aspects while establishing mass appeal? How can they resist the hyper-competitive American model for sport when their sport is inherently tied to lifestyles at least partially characterized by resistance to dominant culture? (516)

Although Quidditch faces many of the same issues that confront both mainstream and anti-mainstream sports, it faces them within the context of its own specific character and circumstance, as well as its own well publicized ideology and stated purpose. At the very worst, the conventional stress on success and competition threatens the promise and goal of equality and coeducation that have served as the ideological wellspring of the sport from the very beginning. The threat is expressed in several ways. First, as Cohen et al. (2014) report, there is a latent tension between athletes who take the game seriously and place a high emphasis on winning—those who believe that Quidditch is “not just some game that allowed whimsy and silliness” (228)—and those who emphasize participation. In reference to the 2011 World Cup, Cohen, Melton and Peachey note that “while some teams aimed to keep the experience fun and casual, others were driven by competition and championships ” which led to “players of uneven ability competing against each other …. which negatively impacted inclusivity” (231). Despite the fact that Quidditch mandates inclusivity and equality—and maybe because of it—some of the males appeared to embrace inclusivity “out of obligation or legislatively mandated equality, instead of deriving from true levels of mutual respect ” (231), suggesting that some male players may still harbour an ambivalent sexism towards women in sport. Secondly, Cohen, Melton and Peachy note that although Quidditch “seemingly was successful in reducing stereotypes, some male athletes had lingering opinions of female athletes not having the same ability as their male counterparts ” (229), specifically that they were not “physical enough to compete on an equal playing field with men in all sports ” (229). The increased stress on winning may account for the finding that concussion injuries are over-represented in the sport of Quidditch, especially for women (Pennington et al., 2017, p. 837). The shift in priority from

11

THE WONDERFUL WORLD OF QUIDDITCH …

221

participation to winning leads Cohen, Melton and Peachey (2914) to contemplate that “the possibility of females once again becoming marginalized could become greater due to males viewing their female counterparts as lesser or weaker teammates despite widespread acceptance of the sport remaining coed in nature” (233). Finally, Quidditch faces the sceptre of an increasing commercialization that threatens to replace the ethic of inclusion with the ethic of winning (Cohen et al., 2014, p. 233). It also faces the sceptre of its own success; a success and visibility that may attract more and more traditional male athletes for whom competitive success and performative physical prowess trump the espoused, broad-based gender inclusive participatory ethic (Segrave, 2015). In short, like other new and socially innovative sports, Quidditch serves as home to a contentious discourse about whether the sport is too competitive or not competitive enough, too inclusive or not inclusive enough, too whimsical or too physical. These debates are not trivial, but critical to the control of what Rinehart (2000) refers to as the “soul” of the sport (513). In which case, their resolution in favour of inclusivity seems particularly urgent in face of the ever rationalized reification of the binary model of sport.

Conclusion In the fictive world of Harry Potter, Quidditch is a legitimately coeducational sport.6 Girls play in the same teams as boys, serve as house team captains and assume all the risks associated with playing what is a physical and life-threatening sport. The players are also treated equally in match commentaries: there are no references to gender differences, no differential descriptors, no particular language invoked or employed and no hint of irony or mockery.7 Both men and women also play in the Quidditch World Cup. In other words, as Mimi Gladstein (2004) points out, Rowling depicts a world where equal opportunity is as natural “as flying broomsticks and nearly headless ghosts” (49). In fact, Rowling’s inclusion of women in Quidditch teams is given without any hint of selfconsciousness, or without editorial. The fact that women play Quidditch on an equal basis as men is, according to Gladstein, “a major statement about equality” (56). Even though Rowling is not evangelical or overtly political in her literary treatment of gender, the sport of Quidditch models

222

J. O. SEGRAVE

full gender equality and Rowling gives voice to a world in which equal opportunity among the sexes is assumed. Although Rowling does not specifically address the issue of nonnormatively gendered athletes, her model of presumptuous equality between males and females offers a compelling vision of gender justice for all genders who are drawn to the world of sport. She is not alone in her vision. Messner (2002), for example, argues that coeducational sport participation serves as a way of “leveling the playing field and simultaneously changing the rules of the game to make the world more just, equitable, and healthy for all” (166). Furthermore, he notes that, “if one is interested in giving boys experiences that will counter the kinds of sexist attitudes and assumptions that they commonly develop in male only sports, then one would likely favor co-ed sports” (2011, p. 167). But creating socially just cultural forms in any context is not an easy task. Racism, misogyny, heterosexism, transphobia and the normalization of inequitable capital accumulation in mass-mediated, corporatized sport strengthens anti-egalitarian practices on a daily basis. As Ann Travers (2013) rightly notes, “It is hard to catch a break in terms of unravelling the privileging power of Whiteness, masculinity, heterosexism, and class” (3). In other words, contemporary mainstream sport reflects and reinforces “various hegemonies of oppression and inequality such as sexism, racism, able-ism, and homophobia” (Kaufman & Wolff, 2010, 154–155). “How,” Travers (2013) asks, “can sport be transformed to cultivate more socially just relationships?” (4) The answer is perhaps that Quidditch is a good place to start.

Notes 1. The US are the current world champions and defeated Belgium in 2018 in Florence, Italy. Twenty-nine national teams competed. 2. In 2018, in Round Rock, Texas, the University of Rochester won the Collegiate Cup; Texas Cavalry are the current community champions. 3. Other variants of Quidditch are played in Russia, Kazakhstan and Hungary. 4. Other sports promoting gender equity include Ultimate Frisbee and Korfball, although these sports do not adopt a politically activist agenda in the same way as Quidditch. 5. Title 9 3/4 derives its name from the fictional platform at Kings Cross station in London that students use to board the Hogwarts Express and the US law Title IX, passed in 1972 to prevent gender discrimination in sports.

11

THE WONDERFUL WORLD OF QUIDDITCH …

223

6. Perspectives on Rowling’s treatment of gender in general is far from monolithic. For a fuller discussion see Segrave (2016). 7. Even in the sport’s fictitious history, Kennilworthy Whisp, a.k.a. J. K. Rowling (2001), records, without commentary, that an all witch team, the Holyhead Harpies, founded in Wales in 1203, defeated the Heidelberg Harriers in 1953 in what was “widely agreed to have been one of the finest Quidditch matches ever seen” (34).

References Bourdieu, P. (1991). Sport and social class. In C. Mohery & M. Schwanson (Eds.), Rethinking popular culture (pp. 357–373). Berkeley: University of California Press. Broad, K. L. (2001). The gendered unapologetic: Queer resistance in women’s sport. Sociology of Sport Journal, 18, 181–204. Burstyn, V. (1999). The rites of men: Manhood, politics, and the culture of sport. Toronto, Ontario: University of Toronto Press. Butler, J. (1993). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge. Chawansky, M., & Francombe, J. (2011). Cruising for Olivia: Lesbian celebrity and the cultural politics of coming out in sport. Sociology of Sport Journal, 28(4), 461–477. Coakley, J. J. (2017). Sport in society: Issues and controversies. New York: McGraw Hill. Cohen, A., & Peachey, J. W. (2015). Quidditch: Impacting and benefiting participants in a non-fictional manner. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 39(6), 521–544. Cohen, A., Melton, E. N., & Peachey, J. W. (2014). Investigating a coed sport’s ability to encourage inclusion and equality. Journal of Sport Management, 28(3), 220–235. Duncan, M., & Messner, M. (1998). The media image of sport and gender. In L. Wenner (Ed.), MediaSport (pp. 170–185). London: Routledge. Fausto-Sterling, A. (2000). Sexing the body: Gender politics and the construction of sexuality. New York: Basic Books. Fraser-Thomas, J., & Côté, J. (2006). Youth sports: Implementing findings and moving forward with research. Athletic Insight, 8, 12–27. Gladstein, M. (2004). Feminism and equal opportunity: Hermione and the women of Hogwarts. In D. Baggett & S. Klein (Eds.), Harry Potter and philosophy (pp. 49–59). Chicago and LaSalle: Open Court. Hargreaves, J. (1997). Women’s boxing and related activities: Introducing images and meanings. Body & Society, 3(4), 33–49.

224

J. O. SEGRAVE

Heino, R. (2000). What is so punk about snowboarding? Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 24(2), 176–191. Heywood, L., & Dworkin, S. (2003). Built to win: The female athlete as cultural icon. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Iannotta, J. G., & Kane, M. (2002). Sexual stories and resistance narratives in women’s sports: Reconceptualizing identity performance. Sociology of Sport Journal, 19, 347–369. International Quidditch Association (IQA). (2018–2020). Official Rulebook. http://iqasport.com/images/IQA-Rulebook-2018-2020—back-up_v2. 1_Meters.pdf. Jackson-Gibson, A. (2017, August 10). How Quidditch and its ‘Title 9 3/4’ rule are magically altering gender roles in sport. http://www.excellesports.com/ news/quidditch-mlq-harry-potter/. Kane, M. J. (1995). Resistance/transformation of the oppositional binary: Exposing sport as a continuum. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 19(2), 191–208. Kaufman, P., & Wolff, E. A. (2010). Playing and protesting: Sport as a vehicle for social change. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 34(2), 154–1755. Lawler, J. (2002). Punch! Why women participate in violent sports. Terre Haute, IN: Wish Publishing. McCaughey, M. (1997). Real knockouts: The physical feminism of women’s selfdefense. New York: New York University Press. Mennesson, C. (2000). “Hard” women and “soft” women: The social construction of identities among female boxers. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 35, 21–33. Messner, M. A. (2011). Gender ideologies, youth sports, and the production of essentialism. Sociology of Sport Journal, 28(2), 151–170. Messner, M. A. (2007). Out of bounds: Critical essays on gender and sport. Albany: State University of New York Press. Messner, M. A. (2002). Taking the field: Women, men, and sports. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Miggliaccio, T., & Berg, E. (2007). Women’s participation in tackle football. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 42(3), 271–287. Namaste, V. (2000). Invisible lives: The erasure of transsexual and transgendered people. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. O’Reilly, J., & Cahn, S. K. (2007). Women and sports in the United States. Boston: Northeastern University Press. Pagoda, S. (2014, August 16). Gender equity in sports—Quidditch wins. Huffington Post, 18–19. Pennington, R., Cooper, A., Edmond, E., Faulkner, A., Reidy, M. J., & Davies, P. S. E. (2017). Injuries in Quidditch: A descriptive epidemiological study. The International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy, 12(5), 833–839.

11

THE WONDERFUL WORLD OF QUIDDITCH …

225

Pronger, B. (1990). The arena of masculinity: Sports, homosexuality and the meaning of sex. New York: St. Martin’s Press. Ravel, B., & Rail, G. (2008). ‘From straight to gaie?’ Quebec’s sportswomen’s discursive constructions of sexuality and destabilization of the linear coming out process. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 32(1), 4–23. Richter, K. (2011, July 12). Quidditch’s Title IX (and three-quarters): Anyone can ride a broomstick. http://msmagazine.com/blog/2011/07/12/quiddi tch-title-ix-and-three-quarters-anyone-can-ride-a-broomstick/. Rinehart, Robert. (2005). “Babes” and boards: Opportunities in a new millennium sport. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 29(3), 232–255. Rinehart, R. E. (2000). Emerging/arriving sport: Alternatives to formal sports. In J. J. Coakley & E. Dunning (Eds.), Handbook of sport studies (pp. 504– 519). London: Sage. Rothblatt, M. (1995). The apartheid of sex: A manifesto on the freedom of gender. New York: Crown Publishers. Segrave, J. O. (2016). The magical world of Quidditch: A fictive model of gender equity. SIGNAL Journal: The Journal of the International Literacy Association’s Special Interest groups: Network on Adolescent Literature, XXXIX (2), 34–41. Segrave, J. O. (2015). Challenging the gender binary: The fictive and real world of quidditch. Sport in Society: Cultures, Commerce, Media, Politics. https:// doi.org/10.1080/17430437.2015.1067783. Theberge, N. (2000). Higher goals: Women’s ice hockey and the politics of gender. Albany: State University of New York Press. “Title 9 3/4.” (2018). http://www.usquidditch.org/about/title-9–3-4. Tjønndal, A. (2017). Sport innovation: Developing a typology. European Journal for Sport and Society, 14(4), 291–310. Travers, A. (2008). The sport nexus and gender injustice. Studies in Social Justice, 2(1), 79–101. Travers, A. (2013). Transformative sporting visions. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 37 (1), 3–7. United Nations. (2007). Women 200 and beyond: Women, gender equality and sport. http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/public/Women%20ansd% 20Sport.pdf. Weedon, C. (1999). Feminism and the politics of difference. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Whisp, K. (2001). Quidditch through the ages. London: Arthur A. Levine Books.

CHAPTER 12

“Introducing” Roller Derby: An Old Sport Made New and Innovations in Gender Policies Adele Pavlidis

As an old sport that has been revived and reinvented in ‘new’ times, roller derby is something of an anomaly in the world of sport. The sport is not driven by motives of profit or corporate success, but by a desire for women to experience the joys and pleasures of competitive contact sport (Pavlidis, 2017). Through the intense embodiment of roller derby—a sport played on roller skates that involves high speed collisions—women are transformed and experience healing and belonging (Pavlidis & Fullagar, 2014). It is a sport in which women embrace pariah identities (Finley, 2010) and where skulls and pink ribbons exist together (Finley, 2010). Roller derby is a mishmash of gender roles and sport cultures. Primarily played and organized by women, the sport is unlike other women-dominated sports (for example, netball in Australia) in that it is not associated with compliant femininity (Taylor, 2001). Roller derby presents something different in the sport landscape. However, this difference raises a number of challenges and points of

A. Pavlidis (B) Griffith University, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 A. Tjønndal (ed.), Social Innovation in Sport, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63765-1_12

227

228

A. PAVLIDIS

tension within the sport itself, as it resists being incorporated into national and global sport governing bodies (Pavlidis & Fullagar, 2014; Pavlidis & Connor, 2016; WFTDA, 2011). In this chapter I introduce modern roller derby, the story of its origins, development and growth so far, along with some details about how it is played and organized in local, national and international contexts. I then go on to discuss the concept of innovation in roller derby and the ways in which social and organizational innovations continually influence how the sport is played, organized and perceived. In contrast to the idea of non-profit organizations as risk-adverse, ‘lowtechnology, traditional organizations’ (Damanpour, 1996, p. 676), roller derby has attempted to embrace technology and innovate in a number of ways, thereby providing an important case study in the field of sport innovation. I conclude the chapter with some final remarks about how roller derby intervenes in the sport landscape and provides a framework for innovation around gender inclusivity that other sports can learn from.

The Beginnings… A derby is, of course, a race. That is how roller derby first emerged. Newspapers reported on these roller derbies from as early as l885 (Storms, 2008), with participants skating for days in a bid to outlast and outskate their opponents. For example, one man skated 1,092 miles in six days! (Barbee & Cohen, 2010.) In the early 1900s women were also involved in these derbies. Storms (2008) notes in her socio-historical analysis of roller skating that crowds were ‘shocked and astonished’ (p. 75) by the skill and athleticism of the women. Leo Seltzer was a roller derby marathon race promoter and it was he who, in 1938, noticed the crowd’s excited reaction to a spontaneous fight between skaters and decided to incorporate elements of faux-fighting (Storms, 2008). The sport became an instant hit and was shown on television in the United States of America by ABC (Barbee & Cohen, 2010), although by 1951 its popularity had waned and the six-team competition folded. Leo Seltzer handed over the business to his son, Jerry Seltzer, who took the sport to the next level, with more teams and international television exposure (Barbee & Cohen, 2010). This version of the game lasted until the late 1970s, with wellremembered teams such as the San Francisco Bay Bombers, the New York Chiefs and the Chicago Pioneers (all based in San Francisco and drawing on the same pool of skaters) and notorious skaters like Joanie Weston and Ann Calvello.

12

“INTRODUCING” ROLLER DERBY: AN OLD SPORT MADE NEW …

229

Around the same time, Bill Griffiths started the Roller Games in Los Angeles, a syndicate of roller derby. This version had a greater emphasis on theatrics (Barbee & Cohen, 2010). By 1973 roller derby had lost its broadcast appeal, although one-off games were still held. In the 1980s yet another version of roller derby emerged, this time motivated by the broadcasters’ desires for entertainment (Barbee & Cohen, 2010). This brand of the game, called Rock-n-Roller-games, was once again managed by Bill Griffith and was kitschy and fun, with music, props, spandex uniforms and a figure-of-eight banked track. Penalties included ‘the alligator pit’, as described by Barbee and Cohen (2010): If a game resulted in a tie, the audience would be gradually cloaked in sexy, manufactured smoke, out of the murk, scantily clad, ‘alligator dancers’ gyrated to a song…two men resembling oily, shaved apes then carried two live gators to the pit, and beckoned the masked ‘gator skaters’ to begin their match race. The first skater to successfully lap the gator pit five times or push the other skater into the pit would gain the winning point for their team. (26)

Surprisingly, this version of the game did not last long, but is nevertheless part of the sport’s colourful history. Roller derby was again revived in the 1990s as RollerJam, this time with Jerry Seltzer again involved. It was a television entertainment sport that embraced fake fighting on and off the field. Costumes became increasingly skimpy and again, audiences dwindled and ‘competition’ ceased (Barbee & Cohen, 2010). It is against this background of skill, athleticism, absolute raucousness and faux-violence that modern day roller derby emerged.

And Now… The ‘new’ roller derby was launched in Austin, Texas, USA in 2001. A man named Dan Policarpo, or ‘Devil Dan’, had the idea of reviving the sport and posted fliers around the town, to which over 100 women responded (Barbee & Cohen, 2010). The initial revival was inspired by his idea, but was taken up and turned into reality by the women who worked hard to organize it and compete. These women called themselves Bad Girl Good Woman (BGGW) productions, where skaters paid monthly dues (Barbee & Cohen, 2010; Joulwan, 2007). Storms states that these women ‘arose from the punk inspired Riot Grrrl Movement of Austin,

230

A. PAVLIDIS

Texas’ (Storms, 2008, p. 80) and it was this movement that has largely influenced ‘the direction of flat track roller derby’ (80), particularly in its emphasis on creating a female space and its non-hierarchical philosophy (see also Pavlidis, 2012). The rules of the new game were made up and incorporated ideas from other sports like hockey and skateboarding and the women’s interpretation of old ESPN footage of roller derby. Barbee and Cohen (2010) note that, ‘in some notable cases, the skaters’ ability dictated rule choices’ (p. 37). For example, originally ‘jams’ (described below) lasted for one minute, but the new skaters could not score enough points in that time and so made them two minutes instead. For penalties, the new roller derby implemented ‘the penalty wheel’ (Barbee & Cohen, 2010; Ray, 2008). Penalties included, ‘a visit to “spank alley” (where select members of the crowd had the unique opportunity to tan a skater’s hide), a fight with boxing gloves, or the ignominy of wearing the dreaded “Jackass helmet”’ (Barbee & Cohen, 2010, p. 38). There was therefore a mix of the 1990s ridiculousness with the simplicity of the 1970s version of the sport. The first official bout by BGGW productions was in June, 2002, and since then numerous internal and external disputes and partnerships have influenced and impeded the growth and development of the sport. The revived version’s emphasis was on entertainment and ‘fun’ and was set up as a business. But soon questions started to be asked by the women involved about how the money that was made would be spent and what the division of labour would be, which led to a split (Joulwan, 2007; Mabe, 2007; Ray, 2008). BGGW productions broke in two, with the new group forming what eventually became known as the Women’s Flat Track Derby Association (WFTDA), which is discussed further in the next section. Roller derby is a highly contested sport and it is impossible to present any one picture of the sport as static. It is, as with most things, a dynamic, political and power infused site. At the time of writing this chapter, the revived version of roller derby has been in existence for approximately 18 years. Even in this relatively short time the sport has changed enormously and is likely to continue to change for decades to come. In saying this, the description of the rules and analysis of innovation in roller derby is not ‘neutral’ as it is implicated in various relations of power (both human and non-human). Change is a constant in roller derby, as the sport adapts and adjusts to various social, political, geographical, cultural, financial and administrative pressures. It is in this way that innovation thrives

12

“INTRODUCING” ROLLER DERBY: AN OLD SPORT MADE NEW …

231

– innovation is at the heart of roller derby, a sport where ‘newness’ and novelty reign.

The Rules… There are currently three sets of rules, the WFTDA rule-set, the USARS rule-set and the Roller Derby Coalition of Leagues (RDCL, for banked track roller derby) rule-set. Despite the rule differences, all the versions of the contemporary game include ‘jams’, ‘jammers’ and ‘blockers’ (skater positions), with five players in each team. The sport is predominately played on a flat track (as opposed to the banked track versions of the past) (see Fig. 12.1), with each team having five players ‘in-play’ at any one time. Each team is made up of four blockers and one jammer (5 skaters in each team). The jammer is the point scorer and it is the blocker’s job to assist their team’s jammer and block the opposing team’s jammer. A game is made up of numerous ‘jams’—as above, each jam lasts for two minutes (depending on the rule-set used). Within each jam, the opposing team’s jammers try to gain an advantage. When one of the jammers gets in front, they become the lead jammer and are in control of the jam. Being a jammer is a truly physically and mentally tough position, as this player is the target of the opposing players—to stop the jammer is to stop the opposing team scoring. Points are scored by the jammer by passing the opposing team’s players. A game is usually made up of two 30-minute halves (one hour in total). Roller derby is a contact sport, but has a limited ‘contact zone’. WFTDA (2019) states on its website that, ‘Skaters cannot use their heads, elbows, forearms, hands, knees, lower legs, or feet to make contact with opponents. Skaters cannot make contact with opponents’ heads, backs, knees, lower legs, or feet. Play that is unsafe or illegal may result in a skater being assessed a penalty, which is served by sitting in the Penalty Box for 30 seconds of Jam time.’ The equipment required for participants includes quad-skates, kneepads, elbow pads, wrist guards, helmet and mouth-guard. A game (called a bout) requires a number of referees (some on skates) to look out for penalties and keep the score.

232

A. PAVLIDIS

Fig. 12.1 The derby track

‘For the Skater, by the Skater’: But Who Is the ‘Skater’? Innovations in Gender Policy and Non-hierarchal Organization Roller derby’s (re)development and (re)emergence on the sporting landscape has embraced innovations in almost every area. These innovations have not emerged through a desire for new markets and increased capital,

12

“INTRODUCING” ROLLER DERBY: AN OLD SPORT MADE NEW …

233

but through women’s struggles to represent themselves in sport. As Tjønndal (2017) notes, ‘Sport entails complex social interactions between individuals, groups and organizations from all areas of the world. In order to understand change and renewal in sport, an innovation perspective can be fruitful ’ (p. 302). At present, issues of change in roller derby have not been examined from an innovation perspective, hence the focus of this chapter on social and organizational innovations through which roller derby has been able to sustain itself in a crowded sport landscape. I argue that the key to roller derby’s innovation is that it differentiates itself from other sports and maintains the sport as a site of empowerment, strength and authenticity, even though this also brings a number of challenges. Tjønndal (2017) argues that a central tenet of sport innovation is its ability to deliver private and public value. She writes, ‘while traditional studies of innovation and entrepreneurship in business and management mainly focus on the creation of private value, and public sector innovation on the enhancement of public value, sport innovation often incorporates both’ (p. 302). Roller derby’s strengths have not been in creating private economic value, but in producing private and public value in terms of social, organizational and community-based benefits. Key to these innovations are the ways in which roller derby challenges and innovates how women (and girls) and a whole range of diverse and marginalized people can be represented, organized and understood in sport. In an article by Conner and Pavlidis in 2016, we wrote, ‘Derby, as a “first-mover” in the space of integration, management by players for players and an overt alternative view offers an avenue for gender emancipation, if players can resolve their own troubled feelings on gender and only if WFTDA ceases its regressive restrictions on what a women is ’ (p. 1360). In roller derby, social and organizational innovations are intricately linked and interwoven in that the social informs the organizational, and vice versa. In Melissa ‘Melicious’ Joulwan’s (2007) confessional tale of her involvement in the very beginnings of roller derby in Austin, Texas, she describes the initial formation of roller derby under BGGW productions as highly dysfunctional, with the league ‘owners’ (the SheEOs) immature and profit driven. Joulwan writes, ‘we were admonished to keep our opinions about league business to ourselves. They informed us that they owned our names, our images, our uniforms… [but] most of the time, however, the SheEOs ignored us ’ (58). As league owners, Iron Maiden, Miss Information and Hot Lips Dolly were keen to promote roller derby and find ways of monetizing the sport. The three soon stopped skating and instead

234

A. PAVLIDIS

focused solely on management and operations, while the other skaters were treated as employees and continued to train and organize all the other aspects of the sport (including rules, coaching and so forth). There was an eventual rift, precipitated by an issue with insurance (where an injured skater was uninsured) and many skaters left BGGW Productions to set up their own league, based on democratic participation and an emphasis on a ‘skater owned, skater run’ organization. The new league (originally called Texas Rollergirls, and later becoming WFTDA) developed a management structure that ‘mirrored a corporate org chart…with one major difference, no CEO’ (82), with the underlying principle of ‘by the skaters, for the skaters ’ (82). The ‘by the skater, for the skater’ ethos is continually espoused, even now in 2019, and challenges those involved in the sport to come up with new, innovative solutions to the problems of growth, expansion and ‘success’. In particular, it raises important questions in relation to identity and belonging—who has the authority to claim the skater identity? As a sport played predominantly by women, how is ‘woman’ defined? Also, how can an organization speak for all ‘skaters’? How can an organization escape the relations of power inherent in organizations? In 2005 the Texas Rollergirls came together with over 50 representatives from 20 leagues around America to form a united governing body (Joulwan, 2007). During a two-day conference they developed their mission and the requirements for WFTDA membership. Joulwan (2007) notes the outcomes of the conference: the mission of the coalition is to promote and foster the sport of women’s Flat Track Roller Derby by facilitating the development of athletic ability, sportswomenship, and goodwill among member leagues. The governing philosophy is, ‘by the skaters for the skaters’. Women are primary owners, managers, and operators of each member league and of the coalition. All member leagues have a voice in the decision-making process, and agree to comply with the governing body’s policies. (241)

The newly formed association produced a list of requirements for any league that wished to be included in its new coalition: – League must play seventy-five percent (75%) or more of their public bouts as Flat Track Derby – Teams in the league must be comprised of female quad skaters only

12

“INTRODUCING” ROLLER DERBY: AN OLD SPORT MADE NEW …

235

– Fifty-one percent (51%) or more of league owners must be Flat Track Derby skaters, whether active, injured, or retired – Sixty-seven percent (67%) or more of the league management must be Flat Track Derby skaters, whether active, injured or retired. (Joulwan, p. 242) At this time (in 2005) the mission and league requirements were a welcome innovation and solution to a) the lack of cohesion and national support amongst leagues around the country and b) the women’s desires to somehow sustain a non-hierarchical form of organization as the sport grew. Roller derby was radical in many ways and opened up sport and physical cultures to a wide range of women who were disengaged from organized sport, or otherwise looking for something that was ‘more than sport’ (Breeze, 2015; Pavlidis & Fullagar, 2014). Roller derby continued to grow and in 2014 I documented over 60 leagues in Australia, over 90 leagues in the UK and over 300 leagues in the US (Pavlidis & Fullagar, 2014). These initial innovations in organizational structure and management attracted new skaters. Roller derby provided a space in which sport, music and the arts could exist simultaneously and enabled women to enact their gender in a whole range of non-normative ways (see for example, research by Finley, 2010; Pavlidis & Fullagar, 2014). As Tjønndal (2017) writes, ‘while sport innovation as an analytical and theoretical framework might be relatively new, the innovation phenomenon is nothing new to sport. Rather, innovation represents new ideas and changes to sport organizations, coaching, sport events, performance and new competitive advantages ’ (p. 292). Innovation is the norm in both elite sport—where the goal is constant improvement and excellence—and lifestyle sports, where people seek new and exciting experiences. This is clear in the case of roller derby, which is a sport that has developed at a time when gender equality and feminism have been incorporated into a wide range of areas of life (McRobbie, 2007). Roller derby has a unique and innovative emphasis on democratic and feminist principles, with its mantra ‘by the skater for the skater’ echoing the cries of many marginalized groups throughout history (HIV + people, people with a disability, people with mental health challenges, people of colour, women etc.) and the related phrase, ‘nothing for us, without us’ (Charlton, 1998). In this way, roller derby resists (rather than

236

A. PAVLIDIS

embraces) being taken up/swayed/influenced by market forces. This has not been a straightforward endeavour and, indeed, resistance, like power, does not operate outside the sphere of government, but rather shapes and influences the ways in which government operates (see Lombard, 2010 for an example of this in skateboarding).

The Woman Question… Central to the question of ‘who is derby’ is the complexity of gender. At stated above, ‘woman’ and ‘female’ were considered synonymous and assumed, and the ‘new’ derby was intended to be a space that was open and welcoming to lesbian and cis women alike. This was a definite innovation in the sport landscape—roller derby was a sport where women could perform femininity in a number of ways and in particular embraced the ‘femme’ (Barbee & Cohen, 2010; Finley, 2010; Joulwan, 2007; Pavlidis & Fullagar, 2014). Roller derby provided women with a sporting space in which they could celebrate their differences and uniqueness as women. Fishnet stockings were often worn, along with tight shorts and themed uniforms (for example, maids, cowgirls, schoolgirls and so on) and parody and pastiche were important elements too. Roller derby was, as Maddie Breeze discusses at length, a site of non-seriousness (Breeze, 2015), where these aspects of playfulness and an emphasis on participation (over competition) were key innovations that supported the growth of the sport. Yet, in claiming to be ‘inclusive’ and ‘empowering’, many were excluded from the sport; some formally and others informally. Those excluded informally were those who struggled to adhere to the group norms—like other sports, norms and power relations shaped participation in particular ways. As Fullagar and Pavlidis (2014) wrote, ‘even in new sport practices and spaces there exists no outside of power and claims to authenticity can produce new normalised truths that are “felt” in particular ways’ (84). In that book we quoted Foucault: The major enemy, the strategic adversary is fascism… the fascism in us all, in our heads and in our everyday behaviour, the fascism that causes us to love power, to desire the very thing that dominates and exploits us. (In Deleuze & Guattari, 1977, p. xiii)

12

“INTRODUCING” ROLLER DERBY: AN OLD SPORT MADE NEW …

237

The struggles of women to find a place to belong to have been noted in feminist philosophy. As Irigaray (1993) writes, ‘the love of self among women, in the feminine, is very hard to establish…love among women has been a matter of rivalry with: the real mother; an all powerful prototype of maternity; the desire of man; of father, son, brother’ (p. 103). Just because roller derby was ‘for women’ and based on principles of democracy and empowerment, it did not mean that it was a space free from power and discipline and the relations of inclusion/exclusion (Pavlidis & Fullagar, 2014). While some were excluded informally—through the felt affects of exclusion and power—others were excluded formally, through gender identity policies that did not include trans or non-gender conforming people. The WFTDA gender policy listed on its website required all skaters to be living as females, clarifying this with the requirement that skaters appearing on the league’s charter rosters are required to provide, ‘…(l)anguage stating that the athlete’s sex hormones are within the medically acceptable range for a female. It is solely within the healthcare provider’s judgment to determine what range is medically acceptable for a female…Should a league accuse another league of not properly determining eligibility of its athletes for participation pursuant to this policy, WFTDA will review the matter pursuant to its current Grievance Policy’ (in Philly Roller Girls, 2011). This gender policy reflected the original requirements for league membership (above), which stated that all skaters should be female. However, disquiet grew within the roller derby community as skaters began to question the inclusive and empowering ethos of the sport. If derby was supposed to be a place in which all women could belong, and particularly those who felt excluded from other sports, why were some women excluded? What about sex/gender integrated sport? Some leagues had both men and women skaters and wanted to form non-gendered teams, but this was not supported by WFTDA. The gender policy developed by WFTDA was in line with the governing bodies of many other sports, including Olympic sports, despite WFTDA’s direct rejection of incorporation by these same organizations. Perhaps due to roller derby’s emphasis on democratic ‘by the skater for the skater’ governance, some leagues and individual skaters spoke out against WFTDA gender policy. One notable example was the Philly Roller Girls (2011), who made their position clear in an open letter explaining why, in their view, the policy was discriminatory and unfair and dissipated the ‘soul of the sport’ (n.p.).

238

A. PAVLIDIS

In the years that followed, WFTDA (n.d.) developed and published a wholly revised statement and policy on gender inclusion in roller derby that outlined a definition of intersex, transgender and gender expansive and went on to state: The WFTDA recognizes that identifying as transgender, intersex, and/or gender expansive is not in any way related to an individual’s eligibility for participating as a volunteer or employee. An individual who identifies as a trans woman, intersex woman, and/or gender expansive may skate with a WFTDA charter team if women’s flat track roller derby is the version and composition of roller derby with which they most closely identify. The WFTDA will actively work to promote a climate that is welcoming and inclusive of transgender, intersex, and gender expansive participants. Any conduct which fosters a hostile environment for any participant on the basis of gender identity will not be tolerated. In addition, the WFTDA will continue to increase its knowledge of trans, intersex, and gender expansive issues through ongoing education for volunteers and staff. The gender identity of any and all WFTDA participants is considered confidential and private. (WFTDA, n.d.)

This revised policy stance is a major innovation in sport and could be regarded as a significant intervention in the sport landscape at a time when other sports are beginning to question long-held assumptions about sex and gender. I would argue that it is only because of the innovations in organization that these innovations in gender policy are possible, and that WFTDA’s orientation to openness to its members provides a strong impetus for it to respond with innovative solutions to issues as they arise. This is not to say that WFTDA is entirely unproblematic in its organizational form. In many of the countries in which roller derby has developed, there have been tensions and overt conflicts with the preexisting governing bodies of roller sports (see, Pavlidis & Fullagar, 2014; WFTDA, 2015, for examples). Central to these rifts and tensions is the question of authority and ownership—who is roller derby? For WFTDA, roller derby is a sport that is governed by them. This is a challenge for a global sport, as WFTDA is predominately an American organization, with the majority of its current board members from the US (the previous board was almost exclusivity from the US, so there has been some improvement, but overwhelmingly the organization is American). However, WFTDA insists on global governance and refuses to work with the national and international roller sport federations, despite its mission

12

“INTRODUCING” ROLLER DERBY: AN OLD SPORT MADE NEW …

239

to foster and propagate the sport. More recently, scholars have noted the ways in which sport is now ‘transnational’ (Rowe, 2017; Thorpe, 2014). This shift requires new organizational structures and innovations in e.g. competition pathways, communications etc. Final Remarks: What Is the Innovative Potential of Roller Derby? Roller derby, I argue, is an important intervention in the sport landscape. As described in this chapter, it demonstrates a series of innovations in a number of domains (social, organizational, community-based) that have enabled roller derby to become a site of social inclusion and dynamic change. Through its focus on democratic values, ‘women-first’ organization and an ethos beyond ‘win at all costs’, roller derby has been able to provide a space for the enactment of alternative sport identities. In providing this space roller derby has supported the flourishing of all kinds of associated business and development opportunities, from market stalls selling roller derby inspired clothing, to using roller derby to promote gender equality in the Middle East and China (Pavlidis, 2018; Pavlidis & O’Brien, 2017). However, the process of becoming (Deleuze & Guattari, 1987) is never complete. In order for roller derby to continue innovating and attracting new participants and audiences, it will need an orientation of openness and fluidity, and in particular an openness to the pleasures of movement and creativity. It is not sufficient for the self-identified female skaters of roller derby to simply carve out a space for themselves to release the feelings of freedom and power that the sport promises. As Deleuze wrote, ‘there is no need to ask which is the toughest regime, for it’s within each of them that liberating and enslaving forces confront one another’ (1990, p. 139). He goes on to say that, ‘there is no need to fear or hope, but only to look for new weapons’ (Deleuze, 1990, p. 139). Innovation in sport provides those ‘new weapons’, which can continue to facilitate the feelings of freedom that are so central to sport. Innovation is at the heart of roller derby. A whole range of ‘new weapons’ have been brought to bear on the sport landscape, including inclusive gender policies, an athlete-governed membership model and an overt emphasis on women, DIY cultures, music and art. These innovations have attracted new fans and new participants to the sport, even though the growth is now slowing down. Initially, roller derby provided an alternative to olympism—a philosophy inspired by the Olympic games

240

A. PAVLIDIS

that Teetzel (2012) summarizes as encompassing, ‘a notion of fairness, which encompasses fair play, justice, and respect for the rules, traditions, opponents, and one’s self; a call for equality, which includes ideas related to non-discrimination and respecting autonomy; and, a focus on ethical behaviour that respects human rights ’ (p. 321)—which is now is open to incorporation, albeit on its own terms (WFTDA, 2015). The Olympics, despite a rhetoric of fairness and equality, have been and continue to be a site of exclusion and the differential treatment of women (Teetzel, 2011). WFTDA’s recently revised gender policy, its firm stance on independence from the international and national roller sport organizations (which adhere to the limiting gender policies of the Olympics) and its aspiration to be part of the Olympics are perhaps in contradiction. However, they may provide the impetus for future innovations in gender policies in other sports, which could eventually make an impact at Olympic level. As a form of contemporary action sport, roller derby is often fragmented, with various cultural contestations occurring (see Thorpe & Wheaton, 2011 for examples in BMX, snowboarding and windsurfing). It is important that sport organizations, including roller derby, interrogate their assumptions around newness, novelty and innovation. Roller derby’s ‘athlete-governed membership model’ is not that different from other not-for-profit (NFP) sports, and its hierarchical structure (see, WFTDA, n.d.) is like that of many others in the NFP sector. Roller derby is far from the utopian sport that many have held it up to be. However, as a collective, it has advanced many important innovations, particularly in acknowledging and opening the sport up to diverse genders and sexualities and attempting to operationalize a democratic organizational structure. There are opportunities for roller derby, and WFTDA in particular, to learn and grow from their challenges and attempt further innovations. As Hoeber et al. (2015) note, community sport organizations, in this case roller derby, should communicate and share its innovations through showcases and other means. As an organization it can contribute to discussions about how global (and national) sport governing bodies might organize themselves differently, so that issues of power and prestige do not plague them and in ways that all members—regardless of their sex, gender, ethnicity or ability— can participate in leadership and decision making. As Winand et al. (2016) note in their article on innovation in NFP sport organizations, managers should encourage a positive attitude towards the development

12

“INTRODUCING” ROLLER DERBY: AN OLD SPORT MADE NEW …

241

of new and different types of knowledge. They write, ‘this requests the creation and/or appropriation of different types of knowledge’ (Winand et al., 2016, p. 305). In terms of sport innovation, roller derby can learn from other sport organizations, and vice versa. Newness and innovation are vital to the ongoing attractiveness and responsiveness of sport organizations. Notwithstanding, management and leadership should be reflexive and open—not all that seems new, is new. Neither is all that has been done before ‘bad’. The elements that have made roller derby the exiting sport it was—music, art, and its emphasis on risk, pastiche and ‘femme’can continue to be developed, alongside a desire for competition and athleticism.

References Barbee, J., & Cohen, A. (2010). Down and Derby. The insiders’ guide to Roller Derby. New York: Soft Skull Press. Breeze, M. (2015). Seriousness and women’s Roller Derby: Gender, organization, and ambivalance. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Charlton, J. I. (1998). Nothing about us without us: Disability oppression and empowerment. Berkeley: University of California Press. Damanpour, F. (1996). Organizational complexity and innovation: Developing and testing multiple contingency models. Management Science, 42(5), 693– 716. Deleuze, G. (1990). Postscript on the societies of control, in lectures by Gilles Deleuze. Retrieved 2 April 2012. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1977). Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. New York: Penguin. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. Bloomsbury Publishing. Finley, N. J. (2010). Skating femininity: Gender maneuvering in women’s Roller Derby. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 39(4), 359–387. Hoeber, L., Doherty, A., Hoeber, O., & Wolfe, R. (2015). The nature of innovation in community sport organizations. European Sport Management Quarterly, 15(5), 518–534. Irigaray, L. (1993). An ethics of sexual difference. Cornell University Press. Joulwan, M. (2007). Rollergirl: Totally true tales from the track. New York: Simon and Schuster. Lombard, K. (2010). Skate and create/skate and destroy: The commercial and governmental incorporation of skateboarding. Continuum, 24(4), 475–488. https://doi.org/10.1080/10304310903294713.

242

A. PAVLIDIS

Mabe, C. (2007). Roller derby: The history and all-girl revival of the greatest sport on wheels. Fulcrum Publishing. McRobbie, A. (2007). Top girls? Young women and the post-feminist sexual contract. Cultural Studies, 21(4–5), 718–737. Pavlidis, A. (2012). From Riot Grrrls to Roller Derby? Exploring the relations between gender, music and sport. Leisure Studies, 31(2), 165–176. Pavlidis, A. (2017). Affective and pleasurable bodies: Feminist joys through sport and leisure. In M. Silk, D. Andrews, & H. Thorpe (Eds.), Routledge handbook of physical cultural studies. London: Routledge. Pavlidis, A., & Fullagar, S. (2014). Sport, gender and power: The rise of Roller Derby. UK: Routledge. ISBN 978-1-4724-1771-8. Pavlidis, A. (2018). New sporting femininities in China and Lebanon: The embodied politics of Roller Derb. In J. Francomb, K. Toffoletti, & H. Thorpe (Eds.), New sporting femininities: Embodied politics in postfeminist times. Pavlidis, A., & Connor, J. (2016). Men in a ‘women only’ sport? Contesting gender relations and sex integration in roller derby. Sport in Society, 19(8–9), 1349–1362. Pavlidis, A., & O’Brien, W. (2017). Sport and feminism in China: On the possibilities of conceiving roller derby as a feminist intervention. Journal of Sociology [OnlineFirst] https://doi.org/10.1177/1440783317721349. Philly Roller Girls. (2001). PRG gender policy, [open letter, online]. Accessed 5th June 2019. http://www.rollerderbyinsidetrack.com/wp-con tent/uploads/2011/05/PRGGenderPolicy.pdf. Ray, B. (2008). Hell on wheels: The true tale of all Girl Roller Derby, texas style [DVD]. United States: Crashcam Films. Rowe, D. (2017). We’re all transnational now: Sport in dynamic sociocultural environments. Sport in Society, 20(10), 1470–1484. Storms, C. E. (2008). There’s no sorry in Roller Derby: A feminist examination of the collective identity formation of women in the full contact sport of Roller Derby. New York Sociologist, 3, 68–87. Taylor, T. (2001). Gendering sport: The development of netball in Australia. Sporting Traditions, 18(1), 57–74. Teetzel, S. (2011). Rules and reform: Eligibility, gender differences, and the Olympic Games. Sport in Society, 14(03), 386–398. Teetzel, S. J. (2012). Optimizing Olympic education: A comprehensive approach to understanding and teaching the philosophy of Olympism. Educational Review, 64(3), 317–332. Thorpe, H. (2014). Transnational mobilities in action sport cultures. Springer. Thorpe, H., & Wheaton, B. (2011). ‘Generation X Games’, action sports and the olympic movement: understanding the cultural politics of incorporation. Sociology, 45(5), 830–847.

12

“INTRODUCING” ROLLER DERBY: AN OLD SPORT MADE NEW …

243

Tjønndal, A. (2016). Sport, innovation and strategic management: A systematic literature review. BBR-Brazilian Business Review, 13. Tjønndal, A. (2017). Sport innovation: Developing a typology. European Journal for Sport and Society, 14(4), 291–310. WFTDA, (Producer). (2011, July 26). Open letter to USA roller sports. press [open letter]. Retrieved 22 September 2011 from http://wftda.com/press/ open-letter-to-users. WFTDA, (Producer). (2015). WFTDA publishes open letters to FIRS and the IOC on the governance of roller derby. Retrieved 8 February 2019 from https://wftda.org/news/wftda-publishes-open-letters-to-firs-andthe-ioc-on-the-governance-of-roller-derby. WFTDA, (Producer) (2019). Summary. The rules. Retrieved 6 February 2019 from https://rules.wftda.com/summary.html. WFTDA (Producer) (n.d.). Women’s flat track derby association statement about gender. Retrieved 7 February 2019 from https://resources.wftda.org/wom ens-flat-track-derby-association-statement-about-gender/. WFDTA, (Producer) (n.d.). WFTDA organizational Chart. Retrieved 13 February 2019 from https://static.wftda.com/org-chart/index.html. Winand, M., Scheerder, J., Vos, S., & Zintz, T. (2016). Do non-profit sport organizations innovate? Types and preferences of service innovation within regional sport federations. Innovation, 18(3), 289–308.

CHAPTER 13

The Creation of Stunt Cheer: A Story of Innovation, Cheerleading and Gender Politics of Sport Nancy L. Malcom, Christina Gipson, Kristen S. Pirie, and Rachel Miller Wood

Introduction The loudspeaker crackles to life as the announcer intones, “From Stillwater, Oklahoma, please welcome the Cowboys of Oklahoma State University!” The crowd cheers as the Cowboys, led by their coaches, walk into the arena. They are dressed in full uniform—body-hugging athletic shorts and a sleeveless shirt with the uniform number clearly visible. Several of the athletes wear elbow braces or have their wrists taped. Their long hair is pulled back in simple ponytails, with no bows or other fanciful accoutrements. They march in double file, many holding hands with a

N. L. Malcom (B) · C. Gipson · K. S. Pirie · R. M. Wood Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, GA, USA e-mail: [email protected] C. Gipson e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 A. Tjønndal (ed.), Social Innovation in Sport, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63765-1_13

245

246

N. L. MALCOM ET AL.

teammate as most also raise their free hands to wave enthusiastically to their fans. One athlete pumps her fist in the air aggressively, as if to signal the team’s readiness for competition. As they make their way to the side of the arena, the announcer continues, “…and from Louisville, Kentucky, please welcome the Cardinals of the University of Louisville”. The Cardinals enter the arena in much the same fashion—following their coaches, walking two-by-two, with partners’ hands clasped together and free hands raised high to wave to the crowd, wearing long-sleeved uniform tops over their athletic shorts, but also featuring bow-less ponytails, with some wearing knee braces. Four members of each team take to the mat and begin their identical, side-by-side routines as Cyndi Lauper’s “Girls Just Want to Have Fun” resounds from the loudspeaker. So begins the 2012 Division I National Championships of College STUNT,1 a “new competitive team sport derived from cheerleading ” (STUNT, n.d.). Recognized as a distinctly American activity, cheerleading traces its origins to the sidelines of men’s collegiate sporting contests. In the early 1900s, cheerleading was an exclusively male activity. Leadership, school spirit, athleticism and respect from the student body were perceived as the keys to successful cheerleading. By the 1930s, cheerleading started to incorporate women and, by the end of the Second World War, many cheerleading squads had transitioned to being predominately female. No longer was leadership—or even athleticism—recognized as the most important quality of a cheerleader. Instead, the traits most commonly associated with cheerleading during this period were wholesome attractiveness, enthusiasm and unwavering supportiveness, as well as superficiality and frivolity, all of which reflected societal notions of stereotypical femininity. While cheerleaders of the 1950s and 60s stood on the sidelines waving pompoms and urging their team’s fans to “stand up and holler”, the activity continued to evolve and by the 1990s a more physical and more competitive cheerleading had emerged. Though cheerleading squads continued in their supportive sideline roles, they also started to participate in cheerleading competitions with other squads. The ability to energize a crowd was still an important aspect of these competitions, as was the ability to build human pyramids, jump, tumble and even fly (Adams & Bettis, 2003; Grindstaff & West, 2006; Hanson, 1995). As one college cheerleader explained in an interview with one of the authors: They’re always going to expect you to look good, but I feel like if we pursue cheerleading more as a sport and keep pushing to have it as a sport,

13

THE CREATION OF STUNT CHEER: A STORY OF INNOVATION …

247

it’s going to be focused on athletic ability. You’re going to have those people who are always going to say ‘Cheerleading’s not a sport, look how dolled up they are’. Well, look what they do, you know? We might not have possession of a ball, but we have possession of a person in the air. You’re not shooting a ball, but you’re throwing a person! (Interviewee—college cheerleader)

The rise in competitive cheerleading, with its greater emphasis on athleticism, occurred at the same time as the larger sporting world was opening up to women. In 1971, fewer than one in twenty-seven girls participated in varsity high school sports (LaVoi, 2012). Schools were under no obligation to provide athletic opportunities for girls. The notion that girls might receive opportunities equal to those that were enjoyed by their male classmates would have seemed preposterous. But this changed in 1972 with the United States Congress’ passage of Title IX of the Educational Amendments. Title IX aimed to guarantee equal opportunities for girls and women in all areas of schooling—both curricular and extracurricular. Due to this law, girls could no longer be barred from using the school’s science labs or from joining its maths team. Women who wished to pursue a career in medicine could no longer be denied admission to medical school on the basis of their sex. While Title IX had important implications for academic equity, it turned out to be just as important for achieving athletic opportunities (Ware, 2007). The number of American girls and women participating in sports skyrocketed following the passage of Title IX (Carpenter & Acosta, 2005; Suggs, 2005). In the 1972– 73 school year, only 294,015 girls participated in varsity high school sports. Just one year later that number had risen to 817,073 and in the 1973–74 school year the number of female participants rose to 1,300,169 (National Federation of State High School Associations, n.d.). Participation rates continued to climb in the decades that followed and by 2018 more than 3.4 million American girls were competing at the varsity level in high school sports (National Federation of States High School Associations, n.d.), representing approximately one in every 2.5 high school girls (LaVoi, 2012). Prior to Title IX, cheerleading was one of the few socially approved outlets for an athletically inclined girl. Whereas traditional sports such as football, baseball, basketball and hockey were believed to embody ideal masculinity, by the 1950s cheerleading was widely understood to represent ideal femininity (Adams & Bettis, 2003; Grindstaff & West,

248

N. L. MALCOM ET AL.

2006). When girls and women took to the fields, courts and ice to pursue what had been traditionally masculine sporting activities, they were often seen as rejecting traditional femininity and threatening the gender order (Nelson, 2007). Cheerleading was not seen to introduce this sort of threat. Yet girls’ and women’s increased involvement in traditional sports led to the greater acceptance of female athleticism, which itself helped to spur the increased emphasis placed on tumbling and acrobatics in cheerleading. As cheerleading became more physically demanding and athletically-oriented, schools and colleges began to question whether the activity could count as a sporting opportunity for the purposes of determining Title IX compliance. Although Title IX does not specifically mention sports, this amendment was written to assure full participation opportunities for girls and women in all educational activities, including school-based sporting programmes. Based on a 1979 policy interpretation, a school’s athletic programme’s compliance with Title IX is determined by a “three prong test”. In order to be in compliance, schools must demonstrate that: (1) the sporting opportunities they provide to their male and female students are approximately proportionate to their enrolment, (2) that they have a history of making progress toward proportionate representation, or (3) that despite neither having proportionate representation nor a history of progress, they have accommodated the interests of the historically underrepresented (female) student body. While the Department of Education’s Office (DOE) for Civil Rights has the power to investigate and enforce Title IX violations, they largely rely on educational institutions to monitor and report their own compliance statuses. To this day, because DOE lacks the resources to conduct full or comprehensive investigations, most of the challenges to Title IX regulations and charges of Title IX violations only occur when aggrieved parties file lawsuits. As a result, questions about Title IX compliance are resolved through the federal court system, rather than within DOE (Carpenters & Acosta, 2005; Graham, 1998; Hogshead-Makar & Zimbalist, 2007; Kennedy, 2010; Stafford, 2004; Suggs, 2005). Given this history, there was little surprise when Quinnipiac University varsity volleyball player Stephanie Biedeger, along with four of her teammates and their head coach, filed a suit against their university. In early 2009, Quinnipiac University announced plans to cut its men’s golf and outdoor track teams and its women’s volleyball team. On their own, these

13

THE CREATION OF STUNT CHEER: A STORY OF INNOVATION …

249

changes would have changed the school’s participation ratio to put Quinnipiac University in non-compliance with Title IX. But the school officials also explained that they intended to add roster slots to the women’s cross country team and to create a new women’s varsity team—competitive cheerleading. Ultimately, Biedeger prevailed. Significant parts of Judge Stefan Underhill’s ruling centred on the question of whether Quinnipiac University could, for the purpose of determining women’s sports participation, justifiably triple-count its female cross-country runners who were required by their coach to also participate in the indoor and outdoor track teams. However, the judicial decision attracted national attention due to its ruling on competitive cheerleading. As Judge Underhill wrote: “I hold that the University’s competitive cheerleading team does not qualify as a varsity sport for the purposes of Title IX, and, therefore, its members may not be counted as athletic participants under the statute” (Beideger et al. v. Quinnipiac Univ., p. 2). This chapter takes an in-depth look at the creation of STUNT cheer through the lens of sport innovation. Emerging at a time when there was greater societal acceptance of female physicality and athleticism, STUNT cheer represents a challenge to traditional gendered expectations of women in cheerleading. Because STUNT was created as a direct result of a court case in which a federal judge declared that traditional forms of cheerleading failed to comply with Title IX’s legal mandate for gender equity in sport, STUNT can be seen as representing both social and organizational innovation (Tjonndal, 2017). Furthermore, when USA Cheer stepped forward to create the new sport they called STUNT, we see an element of social entrepreneurship in which innovations in sport result from a combination of social elements to promote equity and business models based on an entrepreneurial spirit that seeks to fill societal demands (Peterson & Schenker, 2017).

The Case of the Quinnipiac Competitive Cheer Team Ever since its passage in 1972, the history of Title IX and women’s sports has been riddled with institutional non-compliance, foot-dragging, obstinacy and questionable reporting practices. Numerous court cases have both challenged and ultimately upheld the federal government’s role in ensuring equality of opportunities for female athletes. In this light, the story involving Quinnipiac University is wholly unremarkable. What is

250

N. L. MALCOM ET AL.

remarkable is the innovation that followed. In response to the federal court ruling, USA Cheer created a new sport (USA Cheer, n.d.). In 2011 it formed the College Stunt Association (College Stunt Association, n.d.) and sponsored the inaugural season of STUNT, described as “the new competitive team sport derived from cheerleading ”.2 Up to this point, cheerleading had been dominated by two distinct forms: traditional, or sideline cheerleading, and competitive cheerleading. Traditional cheerleading usually refers to the activities of cheerleading squads that are performed on the sidelines at other sporting events, typically at boys’ and men’s basketball and football matches. Also known as sideline cheering, the primary goal is to energize and entertain the crowd. In addition to appearing on the sidelines at basketball and football games, these cheerleaders are often expected to perform at parades, pep rallies and other school events, such as homecoming celebrations (Adams & Bettis, 2003; Hanson, 1995; Varsity Brands, 2011). Though many contemporary sideline cheer squads incorporate tumbling and acrobatics in their routines and thus exhibit a high degree of athleticism, these squads do not actually engage in competition. In contrast, competitive cheerleading squads face off against other squads and perform their choreographed routines in front of judges who score them according to the quality of their execution. To many observers, competitive cheerleading appears to be a sport in its own right. Yet, as Judge Underhill found in his investigation of the Quinnipiac competitive cheer team, this activity often falls short of both the social and legal expectations for true sporting activities. Many who criticize the notion that cheerleading is a sport are troubled by the degree to which the activity seems to emphasize aesthetics over athletics. Although a successful competitive cheerleading squad must demonstrate a high degree of athletic skill, most judges also pay close attention to the squad’s overall appearance, their showmanship and their crowd appeal. Competitive cheerleaders are expected to smile throughout the routine and must pay special attention to their makeup and hairstyles. These criteria are included in the score sheets the judges use to evaluate squads. For instance, a score sheet used by the Georgia High School Association (2012) includes crowd appeal, good energy and good facials as criteria for overall showmanship. Another score sheet published by the Long Island Cheerleading Coaches Association (2011) also awards points for crowd appeal and showmanship and specifically instructs judges to look for “an All American image”.

13

THE CREATION OF STUNT CHEER: A STORY OF INNOVATION …

251

While these judging criteria can be disconcerting to those who believe that the outcomes of sporting competition should be determined by athletic skill rather than physical appearance, the inclusion of these kinds of subjective criteria are not in themselves disqualifying factors when it comes to determining whether an activity is a sport or not. In contemporary American society, and across the globe, gymnastics and figure skating are widely accepted as competitive sports, both of which rely on judges’ assessments of athletes’ physical skills as well as their ability to energize the crowd and carefully control their facial expressions and outward emotions (Feder, 1994; Ryan, 1996). But in the case of competitive cheerleading, the emphasis on aesthetics has not been the only stumbling block to recognition as a bona fide sport. In his 2010 ruling, Judge Underhill focused on a number of key differences between the competitive cheer squad and other varsity sports teams sponsored by Quinnipiac University. Unlike most other varsity athletes, the members of Quinnipiac’s competitive cheer team were not provided with space for changing rooms. Similarly, members of the competitive cheer team were not covered by the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s (NCAA) catastrophic insurance and had to purchase this insurance coverage separately. In March 2009, when Quinnipiac decided to form a competitive cheer team and sought to hire a head coach, despite having advertised for a candidate who was familiar with NCAA regulations and experienced in recruiting student-athletes, they ultimately hired their former sideline cheerleading coach who had no recruitment experience and was not certified by the NCAA to recruit student-athletes. As a result, Quinnipiac was not allowed to recruit high school athletes. Even though the popularity and athleticism of high-school level all-star cheerleading had soared, the Quinnipiac competitive cheer team was unable to recruit high school athletes to join its team in its inaugural season and was instead composed entirely of students who were already enrolled at the university.3 Most troubling was the lack of organizational structure under which the team competed. Even though Quinnipiac University joined with a handful of other schools to form the National Competitive Stunt and Tumbling Association (NCSTA), this independent organization lacked significant regulatory oversight and failed to provide guidance regarding the formats for head-to-head competitions, guidelines for scoring, or any mechanism for ranking teams, such as regular-season seeding of teams or a post-season playoff system. As a result, Quinnipiac’s competitive

252

N. L. MALCOM ET AL.

cheer team participated in contests utilizing a variety of different formats against a wide array of opponents. Some of their purported competitions were advertised as “exhibitions” and only featured a performance of the team’s routine without any actual competition. While these exhibition performances could be used to engender interest and enthusiasm in the sport, they also indicated the dearth of teams available to participate in competition. When the team did compete against other squads, the rules for scoring would vary from meet to meet. In some of their competitions they faced off against other collegiate competitive cheer teams, but in other competitions they faced college-level sideline cheering squads, private club teams and even high-school all-star teams. It was this organizational and structural inconsistency that led Judge Underhill to write, “If Quinnipiac is serious that its competitive cheer team is a legitimate varsity sport, then it should not tolerate its team playing against non-varsity collegiate teams, non-scholastic all-star teams, and, especially, athletes who are still in high school ” (Beideger et al.v. Quinnipiac Univ., p 65). Altogether, this evidence led Judge Underhill to rule against Quinnipiac’s inclusion of competitive cheer as a sport and to further explain that “Competitive cheer may, some time in the future, qualify as a sport under Title IX; today, however, the activity is still too underdeveloped and disorganized to be treated as offering genuine varsity athletic participation opportunities for students ” (Beideger et al. v. Quinnipiac Univ., p 2).

Methods We use a mixed-methods approach to examine the emergence of STUNT as an innovative new form of competitive cheerleading. The project started with the participant-observation experiences of authors Kristen Pirie and Rachel Miller Wood, who noted the curious ways in which STUNT cheer seemed to be constructed to emulate the structure of American football games. We rely on primary documents to tell the story of the creation of STUNT cheer. These documents include cheerleading judges’ score cards, a programme handed out to spectators at a STUNT competition, videos and news items posted on the STUNT website and the STUNT playbook provided to coaches and athletes. As STUNT cheer emerges in the context of the federal court’s decision in Beideger et al. v. Quinnipiac University, we rely heavily on the court opinion written by Judge Stefan Underhill. In spring 2012 we used a snowball sampling

13

THE CREATION OF STUNT CHEER: A STORY OF INNOVATION …

253

technique to distribute a questionnaire survey to college-level STUNT cheer participants. This survey was completed by seventeen female cheerleaders between the ages of eighteen and twenty-four. While most of the survey respondents had participated in only one year of STUNT cheer, on average they reported over eight years of sideline cheerleading and more than eight years of competitive cheering experience. This survey included open-ended questions in which respondents described the differences between STUNT and other cheerleading activities, described the extent to which physical appearance was emphasized in STUNT, explained whether or not they viewed themselves as athletes and explained whether or not they thought that cheerleading should be counted as a sport. During this same time period, author Rachel Miller Wood conducted indepth focus interviews with five female college-level cheerleaders, all of whom had participated in at least one season of STUNT. These interviews explored the subjects’ attitudes about the link between physical appearance, cheerleading and sport.

Becoming Sport? Organizing and Regulating STUNT Cheer Judge Underhill’s comments made it clear that greater organization was needed to foster genuine athletic opportunities for cheerleaders. USA Cheer, a non-profit competitive cheerleading organization that was founded in 2007, was ready to fill that gap (USA Cheer, n.d.). The newly developed sport of STUNT cheer provides rules and guidelines for head to head team competitions, while also offering an organizational structure to support both regular-season competitions and post-season playoffs. As explained in a brochure provided at the 2011 Inaugural Season Southeast Region STUNT tournament, “STUNT removes the crowd-leading element and focuses on the technical and athletic components of cheer, including partner stunts, pyramids, basket tosses, jumps and tumbling, as well as dynamic team performance.” Formally, STUNT competitions are divided into four quarters, with each quarter featuring a different skill. In the 2011 season, the first quarter was devoted to stunts, the second quarter to group jumps and tumbling and the third quarter to pyramids and tosses.4 The fourth quarter is reserved for the team performance, which is the only opportunity each team has to perform its own unique, choreographed routine. At the start of the season, all STUNT cheer teams are given a playbook

254

N. L. MALCOM ET AL.

containing pre-determined routines for each of the first three quarters of the competition. Each routine has a different level of difficulty. Between two and four teams can take part in a competition. Before each competition begins, officials toss a coin or draw numbers to determine which team has “possession” during the first quarter. The team with possession “calls the play” by deciding which routine to perform and, if more than two teams are participating, which two teams will perform first. The teams then compete two at a time, performing side-by-side on the mat in front of a panel of judges with each team executing the same routine or “play.” The judges rank the performances and award points for each quarter, with the scores determining which team gains possession in subsequent quarters.

From Aesthetics to Athletics? Cheerleaders who took part in the inaugural season of STUNT make clear distinctions between this new activity and traditional cheerleading. In a preliminary questionnaire survey completed in early 2012 by seventeen collegiate STUNT cheer participants, we asked how STUNT differed from other cheering activities. Eight of these respondents specifically mentioned that STUNT was more like a sport with a greater emphasis on athleticism, and an additional four respondents explained that STUNT was a true competition requiring skill and strategy. As one respondent bluntly stated, “It’s not your normal cheerleading. You actually have to have athletic ability” (respondent #1). Other participants provided more in-depth explanations, such as “STUNT differs from other cheering activities because it compares teams competitively in a new way. It allows teams to show their level of athleticism through the earning of points, just like any other sport ” (respondent #11) and: STUNT is like a game. There are plays that are called in 3 different quarters, and a 4th quarter where you do your competition routine. This differs from other cheerleading activities because there is strategy used in beating your opponents, rather than doing one routine and hoping it’s better than the other teams. (Respondent #14)

A few participants mentioned the different requirements for physical appearance. As one cheerleader informed us, “STUNT allows for the more competitive and more ‘sport-like’ qualities to the sport of cheerleading to

13

THE CREATION OF STUNT CHEER: A STORY OF INNOVATION …

255

come out. Losing skirts and exchanging them for numbered uniforms allows for an emphasis on skills instead of aesthetics ” (respondent #6). As traditional cheerleading has been so widely criticized for its emphasis on physical attractiveness and the beauty ideal, we were particularly interested in the perspectives held by STUNT participants on this issue. In contrast to the scoring rules that typically govern competitive cheerleading, STUNT cheer judges do not evaluate the squad’s crowd appeal or its ability to energize spectators. Rather, the points that are awarded are based solely on the athletes’ execution of the required tumbling sequences, tosses, pyramids and stunts. STUNT athletes who responded to our questionnaire survey unanimously confirmed this difference between STUNT and other forms of cheerleading. In one survey question, we asked respondents whether their experiences with STUNT differed from other forms of cheerleading with regard to the emphasis placed on appearance, including hairstyles, makeup and facial expressions. Some of the responses included: STUNT is different than other forms of cheerleading because they are not judging you on what the team’s appearance is…. The team is not required to have makeup on, have certain hairstyles, and they don’t even have to smile. The teams are judged on how the skills are executed, not what you look like. (Respondent #12) It is very different in STUNT because aesthetics are not noted. STUNT is based solely on what you do on the mat, and if you complete the play better than your opponent. You don’t wear bows and you don’t have to wear makeup. Athletes competing also don’t have to wear their hair the same versus in a normal competition cheerleading setting. (Respondent #14) In STUNT you don’t have to put on all the glitz and glam like competitive cheerleading. (Respondent #2) We did NOT fix our hair, put on makeup and we didn’t have to smile … I truly enjoyed not having to do any of the above! (Respondent #9)

Given that the organizers of STUNT cheer were explicit in their desire to de-emphasize the role of aesthetics in this activity, these are exactly the sort of responses we expected from participants. What we did not expect to hear was that at least some of these athletes were actually discouraged

256

N. L. MALCOM ET AL.

from paying special attention to their physical appearance, because doing so would signal to the judges that they were not serious athletes. Yet this is what some of the STUNT participants told us: STUNT uniforms have numbers on them like other usual athletic sports teams, and people are encouraged to wear no ‘competition cheerleading makeup.’ STUNT is all about the skills, and how each team can perform certain skills to the best of their abilities. (Respondent #6) There was no image to uphold and ‘dressing the part’ was more discouraged than expected. We were able to literally pull our hair back and take the mat. (Respondent #7) Absolutely a huge difference with STUNT cheer. I was told to not wear much makeup or lipstick, to not wear a bow or a skirt, and to wear my hair slick back and out of my face. Basically, we were told to look like ‘true’ athletes, such as a basketball or volleyball player. (Respondent #15)

While it is easy to understand why STUNT cheer would want to change the rules so that competition is based solely on skills rather than on appearance, what is more difficult to comprehend is, why would coaches and other STUNT officials take the extra step to discourage these athletes from wearing makeup or hair bows? Part of the answer to this question can be found in another participant’s response to our question. As this athlete noted, “In STUNT there is no makeup, no bows, no revealing uniforms. It is all about skill. I think in order for cheerleading to be taken seriously, those aspects of the sport had to be taken away” (respondent #11). Cheerleading’s past emphasis on aesthetic appeal undermines its acceptance as a bona fide sporting activity. Nothing in Judge Underhill’s ruling suggests that this is necessary for competitive cheerleading to count as a sport, and STUNT was developed as a direct result of the Quinnipiac decision. However, cheerleading’s status as a sport is not only decided by the federal judiciary—it is also judged in the court of public opinion and social perception. It is clear that when creating STUNT, USA Cheer was motivated by a need to address Judge Underhill’s critique of the erstwhile sport known as competitive cheerleading. In his ruling, Underhill focused on the myriad ways in which competitive cheerleading at Quinnipiac University had failed to measure up to other varsity sports at the same university, leading

13

THE CREATION OF STUNT CHEER: A STORY OF INNOVATION …

257

to his conclusion that this activity did not provide genuine athletic participation opportunities for female athletes. Yet, it seems that USA Cheer was also motivated by a desire to change public perceptions about cheerleading. Recognizing that cheerleading’s traditional emphasis on beauty and aesthetic appeal causes some people to reject it as a true sport, STUNT cheer seems to have taken both formal and informal steps to reduce this aspect of the activity, while at the same time radically altering its structure so that it mimics traditional male models of sport. Judge Underhill’s ruling signals that in order for competitive cheerleading to be recognized as a sport the activity needs to grow and develop. This is more a matter of relatively minor reform than radical social change. For example, it was not the structure of competition that led to problems for the Quinnipiac squad, but rather the lack of consistent structure. In most competitive cheerleading events, teams take it in turns to perform their own choreographed two-minute routines on the stage. Each team has a different routine and is mainly judged on how well it executes the elements of that routine. A similar structure is used in individual gymnastics competitions, where, for example, gymnasts take turns performing choreographed routines on the various apparatus, such as the balance beam, parallel bars and the floor. The structure itself, where competition outcomes are based on judges’ subjective evaluations of both the athletic skills and the aesthetic performance, does not prohibit the activity from being recognized as a sport. However, during the Quinnipiac University competitive cheerleading team’s inaugural season, different sets of rules and scoring criteria were used at different meets. Thus, the structure of the competition was inconsistent. One of the key defining features of modern sport is the standardization of rules and regulations (Guttmann, 1978) and up to this point competitive cheerleading had failed to provide this level of standardization. According to Judge Underhill’s analysis, an improved organizational structure could lead to the formal recognition of competitive cheerleading as a college-level varsity sport. As a newly created sport, STUNT does offer a stable organizational structure for competition. But STUNT also represents more radical change, as it does not simply represent the development or growth of competitive cheerleading. Instead, USA Cheer has introduced significant changes in the very structure of the sport. With its pre-game coin toss, the use of a standard playbook and head-to-head competition based on four quarters of play, STUNT cheer moves away from traditional cheerleading and its emphasis on innovative choreography, crowd appeal and

258

N. L. MALCOM ET AL.

culturally-prescribed standards of feminine aesthetics. Rather, STUNT’s organizational structure mimics the male-dominated sports of American football and basketball. Although STUNT maintains a clear connection with cheerleading, it is also working to distance itself from the more explicit femininity that is often associated with the activity. The STUNT scoring criteria clearly reveal that scores are based on execution rather than appearance. While none of the rules or regulations pertaining to STUNT cheer explicitly prohibit or even discourage hair bows or makeup, many athletes are very aware that too much “glitz and glam” could negatively affect their scores. As a sport, STUNT has been carefully constructed to move the activity away from the superficial aspects of traditional cheerleading, with its emphasis on the beauty ideal, and towards the more traditional masculine model of sport. Today, the sport of cheerleading is at an impasse. Will STUNT gain official recognition as a varsity sport? In the United States, cheerleading enjoys widespread popularity. Ironically, the fact that cheerleading is not generally recognized as an official sport makes it more difficult to track participation rates. According to the National Federation of State High School Associations, more than 162,000 high school girls were members of their schools’ “competitive spirit squads” in the 2017–2018 academic year (NFHS, n.d.). This participation rate placed competitive cheerleading among the top ten most popular sports for high school girls in that year, just behind swimming and diving, which had 175,000+ participants, and ahead of lacrosse, which was just shy of 97,000 participants Rather than being sponsored by schools, most competitive cheerleading squads are run through private clubs, and estimates suggest that the total participation in cheerleading activities amongst girls and young women tops four million (Morgan, 2017). Given such high participation rates, it is understandable that institutions such as Quinnipiac University would like to offer cheerleading as an official sport. Girls and women have long been excluded from sports, but when participation opportunities are provided their sporting endeavours are typically funded at lower levels than similar boys’ and men’s athletic programmes. Even though Title IX regulations clearly stipulate that schools must provide equal opportunities regardless of sex, educational institutions have sought loopholes in the law that would allow them to continue their unequal funding and discriminatory treatment of female athletes. Some of these loopholes include elevating ancillary activities,

13

THE CREATION OF STUNT CHEER: A STORY OF INNOVATION …

259

such as cheerleading and dance squads, to varsity sport status without providing equitable resources or genuine opportunities for competition. In their position paper on this subject, the Women’s Sports Foundation (WSF) concludes, “It seems obviously transparent and unethical to [redefine these activities as sports] when danceline, drill team, cheerleading, baton twirling or the marching band are clearly not fulfilling the definitional requirements of sport ” (Women’s Sports Foundation, 2013). In this same document, WSF makes it clear that cheerleading, drill team, or other similar activities could justifiably be considered as sports if they were organized for the primary purpose of competition and provided genuine sporting opportunities on a par with other varsity sports.

Conclusion: The Innovative Potential of STUNT Cheer The story of STUNT cheer is still unfolding. At the time of writing, more than 200 high school sports programs participated in STUNT, along with 27 programs that were affiliated with either the NAIA, Junior Colleges, or NCAA club-level sports. Only 12 NCAA Athletics programs participated in STUNT cheer, and organizers are continuing their push to have STUNT included on the NCAA Emerging Sports for Women list (STUNT, n.d.). As the story of STUNT cheer continues to play out, the ever-present struggle over the definition of sport and the place of female athletes is apparent. No longer simply a story of STUNT cheer, this is a story that highlights the gender politics of American sport. First and foremost, we are reminded that sport itself is a social construction. Sport is created by society. Sport is not rigid, but is malleable. Cheerleaders themselves have been behind many of the recent changes as they develop and hone their tumbling and acrobatic skills, but so have lawyers, judges and representatives of organizations such as USA Cheer. These changes are inherently political, as they involve a struggle for power, including the right to define what sport is, the authority to determine and control the organizational structure of a new sport and the opportunity to realize financial profit from sport. As such, the emergence of STUNT cheer represents organizational innovation in sports, where government institutions play a role in changing the face of sport (Tjønndal, 2017).

260

N. L. MALCOM ET AL.

Gender is at the forefront of this political struggle. Gender hierarchies are embedded in the sporting world (Cahn, 1994; Ware, 2007). This hierarchy may be starkest when women’s sports are contrasted with men’s sports (such as when we compare the attention and resources devoted to women’s basketball with that of men’s basketball), but the hierarchies are also highly gendered. As men’s basketball and football dominate the American collegiate sporting scene, minor men’s sports struggle to maintain position as they jockey for resources within college athletic departments. While sports such as men’s soccer grow in popularity, other sports, such as men’s wrestling, face budget cuts and elimination. In response, wrestlers and other male athletes have filed suits, complaining that female athletes, under the protection of Title IX, are unfairly crowding them out (Walton & Helstein, 2008; Hogshead-Makar & Zimbalist, 2007). Undoubtedly, Title IX legislation has opened traditional male sports up to girls and women, who have gained some measure of respect in their pursuit of activities such as basketball, soccer and volleyball. But how do the sports that are perceived as traditionally feminine fit in? Cheerleading in general, and STUNT cheer in particular, reveal our social ambivalence in this regard. Even as competitive cheerleading grows in popularity, we see organizations such as STUNT reinforcing false dichotomies by purposefully working to de-emphasize femininity in order to gain legitimacy as a sport. Cheerleaders, it seems, can be accepted as capable and competent athletes, but this acceptance comes more easily when they downplay traditional gender norms and when the structure of the sport mirrors traditionally male forms, such as by incorporating quarters, scoreboards, playbooks and numbered uniforms. While these changes might be viewed as concessions to social pressure exerted by gender norms, it is important to acknowledge the innovative potential of STUNT Cheer. This newly emerging sport promises another avenue for achieving gender equity by providing additional opportunities for girls and women to participate in competitive sports, thus representing social innovation (Tjonndal, 2017). Traditionally feminine activities, such as cheerleading, drill and dance, were not recognized as “true” sports, yet STUNT is paving the way for activities such as these to be seen as acceptable and respectable sporting activities alongside traditionally male dominated activities such as football and basketball. Historically, sideline cheerleading was re-defined after World War II when participants were no longer recognized for their leadership and athletic skills due to the

13

THE CREATION OF STUNT CHEER: A STORY OF INNOVATION …

261

increase in female participation. Now, cheerleading is being redefined once again as girls’ and women’s physical feats of athleticism are showcased in cheerleading competitions. While competitive cheer competitions have sought to combine the athletic aspects of cheerleading with the aesthetic qualities of the sport—emphasizing both the beautiful tosses and tumbles as well as the beautiful smiles and hairstyles of the cheerleaders—STUNT Cheer is taking a unique approach in distinguishing between these two approaches to aesthetic sport. As such, STUNT seeks to emphasize the beauty of athleticism, including both the strength and grace needed to perform the pyramids, tosses and tumbles, while minimizing the importance of the athletes’ appearances. In doing so, it casts participants as true athletes whose muscular strength and physical skills are the most important factors of the competition. The sport of STUNT can be seen as a result of both social innovation and organizational innovation, but it also represents social entrepreneurship (Peterson & Schenker, 2017). By creating STUNT cheer in direct response to Judge Underhill’s legal ruling that competitive cheerleading failed to represent genuine varsity athletic participation opportunities for female athletes, USA Cheer positioned itself as a new sport provider. This organization recognized the social element which called for increased access and gender equity in sport and partnered these social goals with a business model to introduce STUNT, an innovative sport. The future of STUNT—and of competitive cheer more generally—is uncertain, yet it represents a fruitful avenue for continued examination and research on sport innovation. As a sporting activity, cheerleading has much to inform us about changing gender norms and the place of female athleticism in society. A closer look at the experiences of cheerleaders, including those involved in sideline and competitive cheer, as well as participants in the newly emerging forms of cheerleading such as STUNT, would allow for a better understanding of the construction of sport and its underlying politics. A more in-depth investigation of attitudes and perceptions of cheerleaders, their coaches and spectators could provide valuable insights into these issues. Future research needs to pay attention to the ways in which cheerleading continues to develop and evolve. Will new forms of cheerleading be incorporated into the mainstream sporting world, or will this activity remain marginalized on the sidelines as a quasi-sport? If cheerleading does become more widely recognized as a bona fide sport, what effect will this have on the already contentious gender hierarchies in

262

N. L. MALCOM ET AL.

college athletic departments? Also, if cheerleaders are more widely recognized as true athletes, will this lead to a shift in social perceptions of female athleticism?

Notes 1. USA Cheer and the College STUNT Association capitalize all letters of STUNT when referring to this sport. 2. It should be noted that USA Cheer was not the only organization to respond in this way to this ruling. During the same time period, the National Collegiate Athletics and Tumbling Association worked in concert with USA Gymnastics to develop “acro,” a new form of cheerleading that, like STUNT, emphasizes tumbling and acrobatics and is positioned to be considered an “emerging sport” by the NCAA (see Thomas, 2011; Gregory, 2012). This chapter focuses specifically on the story behind the creation of STUNT cheer. 3. Quinnipiac University’s competitive cheer coach passed the NCAA recruitment exam in June 2010. 4. In subsequent years, the order in which the skills were featured was changed.

References Adams, N. G., & Bettis, Pamela Jean. (2003). Cheerleader! An American icon. New York: Palgrave MacMillan. Biediger et al. v. Quinnipiac Univ., No. 3:09cv621, slip op. (D. Conn. July 21, 2010). Available at http://courtweb.pamd.uscourts.gov/courtwebs earch/ctxc/KX330R32.pdf. Cahn, S. K. (1994). Coming on strong: Gender and sexuality in twentieth-century women’s sport. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Carpenter, L. J., & Vivian Acosta, R. (2005). Title IX . Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Feder, A. M. (1994). A radiant smile from the lovely lady: Overdetermined femininity in ‘ladies’ figure skating. The Drama Review, 38(1), 62–78. Georgia High School Association. (2012). “2012 GHSA Scoring Instructions and Rubric” and “2012 GHSA Competitive Cheerleading—Judging Score Sheet.” http://www.ghsa.net/files/documents/cheerleading/2012_G HSA_Cheerleading_Score_Sheet_Guide_3-27-12.pdf Accessed 17 July 2012. Graham, H. D. (1998). The storm over grove city college: Civil rights regulation, higher education, and the Reagan administration. History of Education Quarterly, 38(4), 407–429.

13

THE CREATION OF STUNT CHEER: A STORY OF INNOVATION …

263

Gregory, S. (2012, April 23). Cheer Factor. Time, 179(16), 54–57. Grindstaff, L., & West, Emily. (2006). Cheerleading and the gendered politics of sport. Social Problems, 53(4), 500–518. Guttmann, A. (1978). From ritual to record. New York: Columbia University Press. Hanson, M. E. (1995). Go! Fight! Win! Cheerleading in American culture. Bowling Green, Ohio: Bowling Green University Press. Hogshead-Makar, N., & Zimbalist, A. (Eds.). (2007). Equal play: Title IX and social change. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Kennedy, C. L. (2010). A new frontier for women’s sports (Beyond Title IX). Gender Issues, 27, 78–90. LaVoi, N. (2012, June 14). Title IX: The status of women’s sports after 40 years. Minnesota Women’s Press, 8. Long Island Cheerleading Coaches Association. (2011). Long Island cheerleading coaches association: Competition score sheets. http://www.eteamz.com/ LICCA/news/index.cfm?cat=410228. Accessed 12 July 2012. Morgan, R. (2017, April 24). Cheerleading has evolved into a billion-dollar business. New York Post. https://nypost.com/2017/04/24/cheerleadinghas-evolved-into-a-billion-dollar-business/. National Federation of State High School Associations. (n.d.). Accessed 4 January 2019 from www.nfhs.org/ParticipationStatistics/ParticipationStati stics. Nelson, M. B. (2007). Stronger women. In N. Hogshead-Makar & A. Zimbalist (Eds.), Equal play: Title IX and social change, . pp. 171–177. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Peterson, T., & Schenker, K. (2017). Social entrepreneurship in a sport policy context. Sport in Society: Cultures, Commerce, Media, Politics, 21(3), 452–467. Ryan, J. (1996). Little girls in pretty boxes: The making and breaking of elite gymnasts and figure skaters. New York: Warner Books. Stafford, S. L. (2004). Progress toward title IX compliance: The effect of formal and informal enforcement mechanisms. Social Science Quarterly, 85(5), 1469– 1486. STUNT. (n.d.). Accessed 18 February 2013. www.collegestunt.org. Suggs, W. (2005). A place on the team: The triumph and tragedy of title ix. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Thomas, K. (2011, May 23). Born on the sideline, cheering clamors to be sport. The New York Times. Section A; Column 0; Sports Desk, 1. Tjønndal, A. (2017). Sport innovation: Developing a typology. European Journal for Sport and Society, 14(4), 1–20. USA Cheer. (n.d.). Accessed 4 January 2019. www.usacheer.org. Varsity Brands. (2011). The ABC’s of high school cheerleading. WWW.varsity.com/ event/1181/highschool_cheerleading.aspx. Accessed 16 July 2012.

264

N. L. MALCOM ET AL.

Walton, T. A., & Helstein, M. T. (2008). Triumph of Backlash: Wrestling community and the ‘problem’ of title IX. Sociology of Sport Journal, 25, 369–386. Ware, S. (2007). Title IX: A brief history with documents. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s Press. Women’s Sports Foundation. Cheerleading, drill team, danceline and band as varsity sports. http://www.WomensSportsFoundation.org. Accessed 18 February 2013.

PART V

Conclusion

CHAPTER 14

Social Innovation in Sport: Implications and Directions for Research Anne Tjønndal

Based on the contributions in this book, in this chapter I synthesise the key implications and outline the directions for future research. Social innovation is one of many directions in studies of innovation and entrepreneurship in sport (Petersson & Schenker, 2018; Ratten, 2019; Tjønndal & Nilssen, 2019). This book has aimed to expand on this growing research field. Like much of the sport innovation and sport entrepreneurship literature in general (Tjønndal, 2018a; Ratten, 2017), social innovation in sport lacks empirical foundations and explorations. As Dacin et al. (2010) noted ten years ago, we do not need new theories of social entrepreneurship and social innovation, but need to empirically examine the theories that already exist. I would argue that Dacin’s et al. (2010) point is equally valid when it comes to scholarly work on social innovation in sport today. This book is a first step towards addressing the lack of empirical studies on social innovation in sport. The chapter first

A. Tjønndal (B) Faculty of Social Sciences, Nord University, Bodø, Norway e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 A. Tjønndal (ed.), Social Innovation in Sport, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63765-1_14

267

268

A. TJØNNDAL

presents three implications for research, before proposing three thematic directions for further research on social innovation in sport.

Implications for Research: Methods, Theory and Philosophical Assumptions The theoretical and empirical explorations of social innovation in sport presented in this anthology have numerous implications for future research on the subject. In the following I outline three implications for research on social innovation in sport, based on the contributions in this book. Implication 1: Contextualization of Social Innovation in Sport Practices Existing research on innovation in sport is dominated by theoretical and conceptual studies (Peterson & Schenker, 2017; Ratten, 2017; Tjønndal, 2018c). This is perhaps due to the variety of available theoretical innovation frameworks and the conceptualization of innovation in sport in an already multifaceted theoretical area of innovation research. A key point in this anthology has been to move beyond purely theoretical explorations of what innovation in sport constitutes into empirical investigations of social innovation in sport from different countries aimed at solving different social issues. From midnight football in Sweden to youth sport policy interventions in Turkey, Chapters 4–7 illustrate the importance of context for empirical explorations of social innovation in sport. As social innovation is about finding solutions to social problems (Murray et al., 2010), it stands to reason that social innovation in practice takes many different forms. Midnight football might be a fruitful way of promoting social inclusion in a Swedish city, but it might not work at all in Turkey or Belgium. Most of all, the empirical studies in Part II show that there is no ‘one size fits all’ when it comes to social innovation in sport. An effective solution to a social problem not only depends on what the issue is, but also on the socio-geographic context. For instance, Chapters 4 and 6 explore the same social problem of tackling social exclusion in sport. But the responses to these issues are very different. This may not be a coincidence, but a result of a development of social innovation based on the local context. The same can be said for Chapters 5 and 7, both of which discuss

14

SOCIAL INNOVATION IN SPORT …

269

the involvement of youth in sport. Collectively, the different strategies of social innovation in Part II represent an argument against Hean’s (2015) fourth phase of the social innovation literature—the spread and adoption of successful social innovations. In this sense, a more realistic approach to social innovation in sport might be to be content with the social improvements in the local context of the social innovation, rather than striving to spread them to other geographical areas with different socio-cultural conditions. While this anthology provides some insights into social innovation in sport in practice, only a limited number of practical cases of social innovation are explored. The empirical cases of social innovation explored in this anthology vary from the development of a new app to innovative sport facilities in urban planning and urban redevelopment. The four cases of social innovation in practice presented in this book exemplify the variety and complexity of social innovation in sport. Therefore, there is still a need for ongoing empirical explorations of social innovations aimed at solving different social issues in different sporting contexts. Using Hean’s (2015) framework of social innovation as a theoretical starting point, there is a particular need for studies of the spread and adoption of successful social innovation in order to see what happens in the diffusion process from a context in which the innovation has been successful, to a new context in which the social innovation is implemented and adapted to fit the local area. Implication 2: Methodological Issues When Exploring Social Innovation in Sport Researching social innovation in sport and being sensitive to the context of both the social issue at hand and the frames of the social innovation strategy require a diversity of research methods. The chapters in this book highlight this through the various ways in which social innovation is explored, ranging from digital research methods, observations, qualitative interviews with stakeholders and content analyses of policy documents. A recurring methodological issue when studying social innovation in sport relates to research ethics. Here, a key implication is ensuring anonymity while at the same time taking care to contextualize the social issue and the innovation strategy employed to solve it. Guidelines for ensuring anonymity generally require the researcher to remove information about the individuals included in the study and the context of the study so that

270

A. TJØNNDAL

these aspects cannot be identified by the reader at the receiving end of the research dissemination (Thagaard, 2018). However, in studies of social innovation in sport this requirement is often difficult to achieve. Even if researchers exclude the names of the geographical areas, individuals or organizations involved in the social innovation process, the descriptions of the social innovation strategies are often rich enough to narrow them down to a few possible cases. This issue of anonymity is not unique to researching social innovation in sport, though. For instance, research on elite athletes and elite sport faces the same difficulties, especially as the population of athletes at the top international level is so small that ensuring anonymity is almost impossible (Barker-Ruchti, 2019). Some researchers argue that ensuring anonymity is a lofty ideal that is seldom possible to realize in qualitative research and therefore call for a deidentification strategy, rather than attempting to ensure the full anonymity of research participants (Smith & Sparkes, 2016). Furthermore, thick descriptions of the social innovation strategy and the social issue it is designed to address are necessary if the researcher is to achieve a research output that can be used to disseminate successful social innovations and adapt them to contexts with similar social issues. The authors in this book have dealt with ethical issues of anonymity in different ways. For the most part, the contributors have used common strategies such as replacing names with pseudonyms and omitting the names of the places, people and organizations discussed in the material. However, some authors have been unable to do this without compromising the research output demonstrating the social innovations being explored. Research ethics is first and foremost concerned with protecting participants from harm due to their participation in research (Denzin & Lincoln, 2011). For some of the authors, their scope of study did not revolve around specific individuals but was connected to larger, specific areas (such as in Chapters 5, 6 and 7). In such cases there is less risk of imposing harm on individuals as a result of research dissemination. These explorations of social innovation in sport can also be seen in relation to what is termed the ‘ethics of social life’, where scholars are less concerned about protecting the individual from harm but are more concerned about the research being critical and unmasking social issues, discrimination and unequal power relations at a policy level (Bickford & Nisker, 2015). Based on the experiences of the studies in this book, future research on social innovation in sport should ideally strive to find a balance between the de-identification of individuals, organizations, places

14

SOCIAL INNOVATION IN SPORT …

271

and specific social innovation strategies on the one hand, and a thick description of the contextual frames of both the social issue and the social innovation process on the other. Implication 3: A Need for Critical Perspectives The research provided in this book is in many ways a first step towards a empirically driven exploration of social innovation in sport. The authors in this book are mainly concerned with examining and identifying social innovations at different levels in different sporting contexts. Many of the authors have mapped how social innovation is expressed in different sports and the innovative potential of developing alternative sporting activities and novel ways of organizing sport. However, a shortcoming of this book is a lack of critical perspectives on social innovation strategies applied to sport. Social innovation is not a magical solution to complex social issues in sport. Developing and implementing innovation always comes with risk (Fagerberg, 2005). There is a risk that the social innovation strategy will fail, and there is risk that implementing a novel idea aimed at promoting social improvement in sport will lead to unintended consequences. In a worst-case scenario, such consequences could be that already socially vulnerable groups end up with even more limited access to sport in the local context in which the innovation is implemented. At present very few studies have been carried out on failed social innovations in sport - and this book does not include such studies. However, this does not mean that failed social innovation strategies in sport do not exist. It could mean that such innovation processes are harder for researchers to gain access to or to receive permission to publish and disseminate when the empirical work of following a social innovation process from start to finish is complete. Indeed, the lack of critical studies of social innovation in sport in this book points to a need for more critical explorations of empirical social innovation in sport in future research. Implication 4: Evaluation, Measurement and Underlying Philosophical Assumptions There is a long-held assertion that sport can be used as a tool to create social change beyond the initial benefits of sport participation itself (e.g.,

272

A. TJØNNDAL

enjoyment, socialisation, physical health) and instead leverage improvements in broader social concerns such as literacy, crime and community cohesion. This manifests in multiple theoretical lens, such as social entrepreneurship, social innovation, social impact theory, social capital and sport-for-development and peace (SDP). Social entrepreneurship focuses on the behaviour of individuals and organisations at political and sectoral boundaries creating social change. Social innovation on collaborations between actors and sectors in joint efforts to overcome structural issues. Social impact theory (Latané, 1981) positions itself with corporate social responsibility, while theoretical perspectives on social capital focuses on the development of social networks in sport (Bourdieu, 1978). Finally, sport-for-development and peace (SDP) viewpoints focus on the context and the conditions under which sport programmes make social change. All of these social change research paradigms carry philosophical assumptions about what information is important and how this information should be measured to demonstrate if social change has occurred. The underlying philosophical assumptions of how social change successfully takes places are under-explored in research on social innovation in sport. Generally, the social innovation domain has struggled to deal with an increasing demand for evaluation and measurement of social change initiatives. Multiple alternatives have been proposed at an outcome level to improve the quality of evidence used in social innovation research, such as a participatory research approach, a realist approach or postcolonial feminist methodologies. Accordingly, social innovation in sport and sport innovation management as overarching analytical frameworks are ontologically diverse, but still epistemically concerned with the study of measuring organisational capability to innovate rather than measuring the effectiveness of innovation outcomes. This proposes a challenge that the chapters in this book do not engage with thoroughly, and therefore also an implication for further research on social innovation in sport. There is a need for social innovation researchers in sport to critically immerse into questions of evaluation, measurement and underlying philosophical beliefs of social change in sport. How should one go about measuring socially innovative initiatives in sport organizations? Should we avoid trying to measure it? The same questions should be raised about evaluating when social change has occurred in sport.

14

SOCIAL INNOVATION IN SPORT …

273

Directions for Research The content presented in this book, and in particular the empirical chapters (Chapters 4–13), point to important directions for future research on how innovation can be applied as a tool to solve complex social issues in sport. In the following, I outline three themes and directions for future research generated by the empirical explorations presented by the contributing authors in this book: (1) social innovation for gender equality in sport, (2) radical social innovations in sport and (3) innovation for social inclusion in sport. Social Innovation for Gender Equality in Sport Many researchers have investigated gender and innovation (Alsos, Hytti & Ljunggren, 2016), as well as gender and entrepreneurship (Manolova et al., 2017). This research demonstrates how both innovation and entrepreneurship are often associated with men and masculinity and lead to innovative solutions and entrepreneurial enterprises being dominated and developed by men. In comparison, research on gender and innovation in sport is limited, both social and otherwise (Tjønndal, 2019). In this anthology three chapters specifically investigate social innovation and gender in sport (Chapters 11–13). These chapters show how innovations in how we play and practise sport help to improve gender equality in sport. All three chapters explore the development of new/alternative sports—roller derby, quidditch and STUNT cheer. The sports explored in this book represent three unique social innovations for gender equality in sport. Segrave’s chapter on Quidditch illustrates how this sport is an innovation for more gender inclusive sport practices in terms of categorizing an athlete’s sex. Most sport adheres to a strict categorization of women’s sports and men’s sports. Quidditch, on the other hand, is practised in gender mixed teams. Still, the truly innovative aspect of quidditch is that the athletes themselves decide which sex categorization they associate themselves with. This stands in clear contrast to most other sports, where the categorization of men and women is based on biological gender markers. In this traditional system of separating women and men into two different categories of sport there is an inherent discrimination of women who are perceived to be “not womanly” enough. In these cases, female athletes are forced to undergo sex-testing to prove that they are just that. In some cases, healthy female athletes are also required to artificially

274

A. TJØNNDAL

regulate their bodies in order to be allowed to compete in the women’s category, as is the case with South African runner Caster Semenya. Such issues and discriminative practices could be avoided through the new way of organizing sport competitions in quidditch. However, other issues could also arise from this way of arranging sport competitions, such as the health and safety of athletes when full contact sporting competitions between bodies of various strength and sizes are pitted against each other. Another issue relates to athletes who are unable to define themselves in the traditional gender binary framework. Whereas sport is often explained as being developed by men for men (Hovden, 2000), Pavlidis’ chapter notes one of the few exceptions to this rule by describing the development of roller derby. Pavlidis highlights how roller derby represents a social innovation for gender equality by being a sport developed by women for women. The women-centred history of roller derby deeply impacts the practice and organization of the sport today. Roller derby is one of the few full contact sports to be dominated by women (see Chapter 12). Furthermore, leadership positions in roller derby are also largely held by women, which means that the female domination of roller derby extends into the management of the sport. In their exploration of another sport in which the athletes are largely made up of women—cheerleading—Malcom, Gipson, Pirie and Wood (Chapter 13) investigate the transformation from traditional cheerleading to STUNT cheer. Their chapter shows how women cheerleaders develop this new sport of STUNT cheer in pursuit of a more competitive sport in which acrobatics and athleticism are valued more than an “all-American image” and aesthetics. Both Pavlidis’ and Malcom et al.’s chapters are empirical examples of social innovations in the practice and organization of new/alternative sports that move sporting practices forwards towards gender diversity and equity. A weakness of this book is that social innovation for gender equality in more traditional, established sports is not discussed in any of the chapters included in Part IV. Social innovations that are aimed at improving gender equality in traditional sports said to be made “by men for men” would expand the empirical explorations in this book. Additionally, the chapters in Part IV are case studies from Australia and the US. Hence, the development and practice of Quidditch, roller derby and STUNT cheer in other areas of the world are not explored in this book. It is also not clear whether the socially innovative ways of playing and organizing these alternative sports are similar in other socio-cultural contexts.

14

SOCIAL INNOVATION IN SPORT …

275

Radical Social Innovations in Sport As mainstream digital culture continues to infiltrate sport, we are confronted with a new digital age of sport. This shift is visible in several of the chapters in this anthology (see for instance Chapters 5, 6 and 8). The most notable is the emergence of new virtually played sports, such as Esports (as discussed in Chapter 8). The emergence of Esports symbolizes a radical innovation that challenges how we define what sport is. The same can be said for CrossFit, as the first “fitness sport”, or footbag, with its clear anti-mainstream and anti-commercialized practices. There is limited research on radical innovations that challenge how we define sport, such as those represented by Esports, footbag and CrossFit. As demonstrated in Part III of this anthology, a common feature of such alternative sports is that they are mediated through digital technologies. Furthermore, there is also a divide between practitioners who welcome these new sportification processes and athletes who are against their leisure activity being called a sport (Tjønndal, Hjelseth & Lenneis, 2019). As yet, what the virtual athletes of Esports think about the sportification processes of video game competitions is sparely explored by sport scholars. Another key aspect of radical innovations that challenge how we define and organize sport is digitalization. In Chapter 5, this is highlighted through the development of a new app that is meant to facilitate easy access to neighbourhood sports for socially vulnerable youth in Bruges, Belgium. Undoubtedly, such an innovative way of organizing free sporting activities for youth has the potential to contribute to a more socially inclusive landscape. The same can be said about the new virtually played Esports that, as demonstrated in Chapter 8, are in some cases much more inclusive of youth with physical disabilities than organized sports. On the other hand, these disruptive digital innovations in sport raise new questions and brings unfamiliar challenges. Social media platforms and other virtual spaces, such as those found in apps and Esports, have been shown to be areas of digital maltreatment and harassment for youth and athletes (Kavanagh, Jones & Sheppard-Marks, 2019). Additionally, for youth athletes, the blurred lines between work and leisure online in Esports cause new ethical dilemmas. For instance, is it acceptable for corporate sponsors to require youth athletes to create social media content that promotes their brands, services and products? Or do such practices breach the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child

276

A. TJØNNDAL

(OHCHR)? With articles like “Ten ways to make your child a Fortnite millionaire” (The Guardian, 2019), issues on the borders between elite Esports and child labour are likely to become increasingly challenging in the years to come. In cases like these, erasing the lines between work and leisure for youth elite athletes poses novel challenges that need to be addressed by research. Innovation for Social Inclusion in Sport With a few exceptions (e.g. Peterson & Schenker, 2015, 2017, 2018; Tjønndal, 2016, 2018a, 2018b, 2019), the majority of studies on innovation and entrepreneurship in sport have been within the sport management field (e.g. Ratten, 2017; Ratten & Ferreira, 2016). Due to sport management’s dominance in this research, most of the studies on innovation and entrepreneurship in sport focus on technological innovation, or innovations in sport and leisure businesses. As yet, very few studies have been conducted on how innovation in sport can promote social change in sport (Undlien, 2019; Tjønndal & Nilssen, 2019). Inclusion and equality are concepts that are often associated with social innovation. This is reflected in several of the studies behind the chapters in this book, in that many of them aim to solve social issues in sport connected to social exclusion and inequality. A fourth road to take in future studies of social innovation in sport would be to conduct empirical studies of cases in which innovation is applied as a strategy to promote social inclusion in different sporting contexts. As the contributions in this book demonstrate, social innovation in sport is sometimes linked to digitalization and new technologies (Chapter 5) and at other times to smaller and less radical incremental changes, such as new policies, new ways of organizing and structuring sport (see Chapters 7 and 9). Social innovations aim to make sport more accessible to people from different social groups. Such innovations are important in sport because social exclusion and inequality of access have proved to be prevalent and complex issues for international, national and local sports organizations to tackle (Collins, 2014). The way in which most sport is organized today requires a certain level of wealth and privilege to sustain participation over time. Even if we remove the economic barriers of paying for membership and sport-specific equipment, sport is riddled with hidden requirements that exclude the included (Kingsley & Spencer-Cavaliere, 2015). Because of this, it is not enough to study interventions and projects that simply

14

SOCIAL INNOVATION IN SPORT …

277

aim at including more of a certain excluded and marginalized group in sport, as there is little likelihood of such projects resulting in lasting sport participation, improved health and, most importantly, the enjoyment of sport as leisure. This is where social innovation comes into play. Instead of simply studying which interventions work in the short-term, future research projects needs to go further, be more ambitious and have more of a high risk/high gain nature in terms of how innovation can redefine sport so that it becomes more socially inclusive and less socially exclusive. This will entail exploring alternative ways of organizing sport participation in the future. As long as participation in sport continues to be a vital part of national health policies across Europe (Malcolm, 2018), and social inequality and exclusion remain pressing challenges (Fylling, Baciu & Breimo, 2019; Weil, 2005), continued scientific efforts on social innovation in sport will be needed. The research behind the chapters in this book is a modest contribution to knowledge about how alternative ways of playing and organizing sport can yield a more socially inclusive sporting future.

Conclusion In this chapter, I have mapped the implications and directions for research on social innovation in sport based on the contributions to the field made in this anthology. Implications for research include sensitivity to the sociocultural context of both the frame in which the social issue arises and the context of the social innovation strategy itself, a balanced consideration of methodological issues related to de-identification and the need for thick descriptions of context, and a need for the development of critical perspectives on social innovation in sport. In short, the varieties of social innovation and social issues studied in this anthology highlight the need for deeper empirical explorations of social innovation strategies that both succeed and fail in sporting contexts. For such continued empirical explorations, I suggest the following three thematic directions for future studies of social innovation in sport: (1) social innovations that seek to enhance gender equality in sport, (2) disruptive social innovations that challenge how we define sport and how we organize sport, and (3) social innovations that tackle issues in order to promote the social inclusion of vulnerable groups in sport. First and foremost, the contributions in this book should be read as furthering social innovation as a research field in the sport innovation literature.

278

A. TJØNNDAL

References Alsos, G., Hytti, U., & Ljunggren, E. (2016). Research handbook on gender and innovation. New York: Edward Elgar Publishing. Barker-Ruchti, N. (2019). Insights and implications for research and practice. In N. Barker-Ruchti (Ed.), Athlete learning in elite sport—A cultural framework (pp. 166–178). London: Routledge. Bickford, J., & Nisker, J. (2015). Tensions between anonymity and thick description when ‘studying up’ in genetics research. Qualitative Health Research, 25(2), 276–282. Bourdieu, P. (1978). Sport an social class. Social Science Information, 17 (6), 819–840. Collins, M. (2014). Sport and social exclusion. London: Routledge. Dacin, P., Dacin, A., & Matear, M. (2010). Social entrepreneurship: Why we don’t need a new theory and how we move forward from here. Academy of Management Perspectives, 24(3), 37–57. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2011). The Sage handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Fagerberg, J. (2005). Innovation: A guide to the literature. In J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery, & R. R. Nelson (Eds.), The oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fylling, I., Baciu, E. L., & Breimo, J. P. (2019). EU social inclusion policies in post-socialist countries—Top-down and bottom-up perspectives on implementation. London: Routledge. Hean, S. (2015). Samarbeid, samproduksjon og sosial innovasjon. In I E. Willumsen & A.Ødegård (Eds.), Sosial Innovasjon—fra politikk til tjenesteutvikling. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget, pp. 153–161. Hovden, J. (2000). Makt, motstand og ambivalens: Betydninger av kjønn i idretten. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Tromsø: Universitet i Tromsø Kavanagh, E., Jones, I., & Sheppard-Marks, L. (2019). Towards typologies of virtual maltreatment: Sport, digital cultures & dark leisure. In M. Silk, B. Millington, E. Rich, & A. Bush (Eds.), Re-thinking leisure in a digital age (pp. 75–89). London: Routledge. Kingsley, B. C., & Spencer-Cavaliere, N. (2015). The exclusionary practices of youth sport. Social Inclusion, 3(3), 24–38. https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v3i 3.136. Latané, B. (1981). The psychology of social impact. American Psychologist, 36(4), 343–356. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.36.4.343. Manolova, T., Brush, C., Edelman, L., Robb, A., & Welter, F. (2017). Entrepreneurial ecosystems and growth of women’s entrepreneurship: A comparative analysis. New York: Edward Elgar Publishing.

14

SOCIAL INNOVATION IN SPORT …

279

Malcolm, D. (2018). Sport, medicine and health: The medicalization of sport?. London: Routledge. Murray, R., Calulier-Grice, J., & Mulgan, G. (2010). Open book of social innovation. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/innovation/ policy/social-innovation/. Peterson, T., & Schenker, K. (2015). KIOSK—Om idrott og social entreprenørskap. Malmø: BokBox Forlag. Peterson, T., & Schenker, K. (2017). Social entrepreneurship in a sport policy context. Sport in Society., 21, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/17430437. 2017.1346618. Peterson, T., & Schenker, K. (2018). Sport and social entrepreneurship in Sweden. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Ratten, V. (2017). Sports innovation management. London: Routledge. Ratten, V. (2019). Social entrepreneurship in sport. London: Routledge. Ratten, V., & Ferreira, J. J. (2016). Sport entrepreneurship and innovation. London: Routledge. Smith, B., & Sparkes, A. C. (2016). Routledge handbook of qualitative research in sport and exercise. New York: Routledge. Thagaard, T. (2018). Systematikk og Innlevelse—En Innføring i Kvalitativ Metode. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget. The Guardian. (2019). Ten ways to make your child a Fortnite millionaire. Retrieved August 2, 2019 from https://www.theguardian.com/games/sho rtcuts/2019/jul/29/10-ways-to-make-your-child-a-fortnite-millionaire. Tjønndal, A., Hjelseth, A., & Lenneis, V. (2019). Fra presentasjon til prestasjon? Sportifisering Av Skateboard I Norge Scandinavian Sport Studies Forum, 10, 89–116. Tjønndal, A., & Nilssen, M. (2019). Innovative sport and leisure approaches to quality of life in the smart city. World Leisure Journal. https://doi.org/10. 1080/16078055.2019.1639922. Tjønndal, A. (2016). Innovation for social inclusion in sport. In V. Ratten & J. Ferreira (Eds.), Sport entrepreneurship and innovation. London: Routledge. Tjønndal, A. (2018a). Sport innovation: Developing a typology. European Journal for Sport and Society, 15(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/161 38171.2017.1421504. Tjønndal, A. (2018b). Collaborative innovation: A viable strategy to solve complex transformational social issues in sport? In V. Ratten & Jones, P. (Eds.), Transformational entrepreneurship. London: Routledge. Tjønndal, A. (2018c). Vilje til inkludering – studier av innovasjon for sosial inkludering i idrett [Intention to Include: Studies of Innovation for Social Inclusion in Sport]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Bodø, Norway: Nord University.

280

A. TJØNNDAL

Tjønndal, A. (2019). ‘I don’t think they realise how good we are’: Innovation, inclusion and exclusion in women’s Olympic boxing. International Review for the Sociology of Sport. https://doi.org/10.1177/1012690217715642. Undlien, R. (2019). Lasting social value or a one-off? People with intellectual disabilities’ experiences with volunteering for the Youth Olympic Games. Journal of Sport for Development, 7 (13), 33–45. Weil, S. W. (2005). Unemployed youth and social exclusion in Europe. Farnham: Ashgate.

Index

B Bricolage, 25

C Cheerleading, 246–262, 274 City planning, 102 Co-creation, 83–85, 87, 89 Collaboration, 6, 13, 25, 27, 29, 30, 37, 42, 44, 57, 59, 60, 63, 69–71, 73, 90, 149, 152, 272 Collaborative innovation, 7 Commercialization, 7, 173–175, 177, 179, 182, 184, 221 Critical juncture, 100

D Democracy, viii, 20, 21, 39–41, 47, 48, 101, 106, 234, 235, 237, 239, 240 Design thinking, 81, 83, 86–90, 115, 117, 118, 120, 126, 128 Digitalization, viii, 275, 276 Digital sport, 275

Digital technology, viii, ix, 140, 154, 197, 275 Disruptive innovation, 10–13, 277

E Elite sport, vii, 7, 8, 10, 12, 40, 67, 150, 151, 153, 235, 270 Esports, x, 105, 107, 135–143, 145–155, 275, 276 Evaluation, 8, 23, 39, 42, 44, 88, 257, 272

F Femininity, 217, 227, 236, 246, 247, 258, 260 Feminism, 235 Feminist methodologies, 272 Footbag, x, 169–185, 275

G Gender, vii, ix, x, 10, 11, 99, 126–128, 139, 142, 209–212,

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 A. Tjønndal (ed.), Social Innovation in Sport, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63765-1

281

282

INDEX

214–219, 221–223, 227, 228, 235–240, 248, 259–261, 273, 274, 277 Gender policy, 237–240

222, 230, 234, 236, 237, 239, 240, 248, 259, 270

Q Quidditch, vii, x, 210–223, 273, 274 H High performance sport, 143

I Incremental innovation, 10, 11

L Leisure, 21, 23, 58, 69, 70, 80, 95, 101–104, 106, 136, 138, 139, 171, 275–277

M Measurement, 272 Midnight Football (MF), ix, 58, 60, 62–64, 66–70, 268 Music, 177, 190–192, 229, 235, 239, 241

N Neighbourhood sports, 80, 81, 275 Novelty, 231, 240

O Organizational innovation, 114, 115, 228, 233, 249, 259, 261

P Political reforms, 38–41, 45–47, 49, 50, 74 Power, 11, 12, 26, 43, 65, 83, 96, 117, 121–123, 125, 210, 211,

R RaceRunner, ix, 9, 10 RaceRunning, 9 Radical innovation, 11, 135, 137, 154, 155, 275 Radical social innovation, 273 Roller derby, x, 227–233, 235–241, 273, 274 Rowling, J.K., 210, 212, 221–223

S Self-organization, 81, 84–87, 178 Skateboarding, 107, 151, 172, 173, 180, 183–185, 230, 236 Smart city, 96–102, 104, 106, 107 Social change, viii, 21, 30, 41, 49, 59, 75, 114, 118, 257, 271, 272, 276 Social entrepreneurship, ix, 19–25, 29, 30, 37–39, 41, 45–51, 249, 261, 267, 272 Social exclusion, 19, 58, 59, 74, 75, 99, 103–105, 114, 127, 268, 276 Social inclusion, ix, x, 11, 13, 27, 30, 57–59, 64, 74, 75, 119, 126, 148, 185, 190, 193, 239, 268, 273, 276, 277 Socially vulnerable youth, 80, 81, 84, 89, 275 Sport for development (SDP), 11, 272 Sportification, xi, 151, 173, 180, 182, 184, 185, 275 Sports movement, 38–47, 50

INDEX

T Technological innovation, vii, 7, 8, 10, 96, 97, 99, 101, 276 Technology, 4, 7, 8, 10, 27, 28, 59, 84, 97–99, 101, 102, 105–107, 228, 276 Title 9 ¾, 214–216, 222 Title IX, 212, 215, 222, 247–249, 258, 260 Transgender, 214, 238 Trans woman, 238 U Urban development, x, 96–98, 100, 102, 104, 106, 107 Urban planning, x, 96, 97, 100–107, 269

283

V Video assistant referee (VAR), vii Video technologies, vii Virtual sport, 136, 137, 149 Voluntary sport organizations, 137 Vulnerable youth, 80, 81, 84, 89, 275 Y Youth, vii, 12, 21, 23, 40, 42, 58–60, 62, 64, 70, 74, 80, 81, 85, 86, 88, 89, 101–103, 105–107, 115, 118–123, 125, 126, 128, 136–139, 144, 145, 148–151, 154, 155, 195, 201, 269, 275, 276 Youth Olympic Games, 11, 12 Youth sport, x, 103, 138, 172, 268