Sport for Sustainable Development: Historical and Theoretical Approaches 3031064887, 9783031064883

Citation preview

Kazem Hozhabri Claude Sobry Rahim Ramzaninejad

Sport for Sustainable Development Historical and Theoretical Approaches

Sport for Sustainable Development

Kazem Hozhabri • Claude Sobry • Rahim Ramzaninejad

Sport for Sustainable Development Historical and Theoretical Approaches

Kazem Hozhabri University of Guilan Rasht, Iran

Claude Sobry University of Lille Lille, France

Rahim Ramzaninejad University of Guilan Rasht, Iran

ISBN 978-3-031-06488-3 ISBN 978-3-031-06489-0 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06489-0

(eBook)

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 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. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

Introduction

Sport has been inserted into development discourse and increasingly mainstream development philosophy since the early 2000s with the adoption of sport as one of the strategies toward achieving the former “Millennium Development Goals,” and with its revised place in the newly established “The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs),” sport has become an official tool for addressing the economic, social, and peace concerns. The international policy declarations (Charter on Physical Education Physical Activity and Sport, UNESCO 2015; Kazan Action Plan, UNESCO, 2017; Declaration of Berlin, UNESCO, 2013; and the Commonwealth Secretariat reports, 2015, 2016)—along with significant growth in the number of projects and programs employing sport in development and peacebuilding efforts, have been prominent in recognizing and endorsing the potential contribution of sport to sustainable development. The SDGs provide an important opportunity for those engaged with and in sport to make meaningful contributions to the 2030 Agenda. Although substantial initiatives and projects have been done regarding the role of sport in achieving development goals, only limited attention has been paid to the contribution of sport to international agreements specially the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and there is no considerable academic resource introducing its basic concepts to the students in a simple way. The aim of this book as academic resource is to give a macro view to students of sport sciences to know more about fundamental concepts of Sport for Sustainable Development (SSD), enhance their knowledge about SDGs, and perceive that sport as a conduit can achieve wider development outcomes rather than an end in itself. This view may also push them to think about their future occupation and expand their look into other possible fields that sport may have positive roles. SSD provides a rich examination of the varied practices and experiences about using sport in sustainable development goals and with social perspective on sport, presents the possibility but not the automatism of sport to support sustainable development goals. This book includes seven chapters. In the first chapter, we address the basic concepts of sport development and sustainability. Next chapters support the potential v

vi

Introduction

contribution of sport towards five prioritized SDGs (SDGs 3, 4, 5, 8, and 16; based on the Commonwealth Secretariat, 2015) and the environment as one of the sustainable development pillars that may contribute to SDGs 6, 7, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15. Rasht, Iran

Kazem Hozhabri

Contents

1

Conceptual and Theoretical Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1

2

Sport for Health and Well-Being . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

3

Sport for Inclusive and Equitable Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

4

Sport for Gender Equality and Empowerment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

5

Sport for Sustainable Economic Growth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

6

Sport for Sustainable Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

7

Sport for Peace and Integration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

vii

Chapter 1

Conceptual and Theoretical Perspectives

Introduction From the colonial period to the current neoliberal era, sport and physical activity have been used as a development tool both because sport is so frequently positioned as apolitical and non-threatening and because it is understood to have universal, transnational, and trans-historical meanings (Darnell et al., 2019). Much of the discourse in this field over the last two decades has been framed by “the perception that the use of sport may assist the international development process” (Levermore & Beacom, 2009: 9). MacAloon (1995) has called sport an “empty form,” that is, like any other tool, technology, or social practice whose meaning, use, and impact are dependent on the ways in which it is employed on how and to what ends it is used (Hartmann & Kwauk, 2011). The value of sport as a “universal language” is among the key assets promoted by Sport for Development and Peace (SDP) stakeholders. Many SDP actors advocate that sport can be used as a valuable tool in promoting tolerance, mutual understanding, and as a vehicle for broad, sustainable social development (Dudfield, 2019). Beginning in the early 2000s, intergovernmental organizations like the UN began to recognize sport’s potential in contributing to international development. Between 2003 and 2016, the United Nations General Assembly passed ten resolutions on sport as a means to promote education, health, development, and peace. The adoption of the first set of global development goals (Millennium Development Goals; MDGs) was an important catalyst for the growth and formalization of sport for development movements and became an important reference point for advocates promoting the role of sport in development. Fifteen years later, reference sport as an enabler of sustainable development on the 2030 agenda was more significant. The preamble to the SDGs (UN, 2016) acknowledges sport as an enabler for the goals: Sport is also an important enabler of sustainable development. We recognize the growing contribution of sport to the realization of development and peace in its promotion of tolerance and respect and the contributions it makes to the empowerment of women and

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 K. Hozhabri et al., Sport for Sustainable Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06489-0_1

1

2

1

Conceptual and Theoretical Perspectives

of young people, individuals and communities as well as to health, education and social inclusion objectives. (Yelamos et al., 2019)

This acknowledgment responds to wide-ranging work over the past two decades to design and implement policy and programs to position sport as a contributor to peace building and sustainable development outcomes (Lindsey & Chapman, 2017). This chapter will first briefly outline the definition of concepts in this field. As a second step, it will expand on the historical trend of manifestation of sport in development discourse and recent ongoing actions. In the final step, the limitations of sport as a development tool are described.

Definition of Development The notion of development is related to the past Western concept of imperialism and colonialism, and in that period it implied infrastructure development, political power, and economic policy, serving imperialists as an excellent tool for marginalization and diminishing the power of certain countries (Tangi, 2005). Classical theories of development consider development within the framework of economic growth and development. According to these theories, development is a synonym for the economic growth that every state in a particular stage has to undergo, driven by the transformation of traditional agriculture into modern industrialized production of various products and services, i.e., shifting from the traditional society to the stage of maturity and high consumption. These theories consider developing countries as countries limited by the poor allocation of the resources emerging as a result of the firm hand of government and corruption, inefficient and insufficient economic initiatives, but also political, institutional, and economic austerity, whereby being captured in dependence and domination of developed wealthy states (Todaro & Smith, 2003). According to several neoliberal and modern development theories established over the past 60 years (Willis, 2005) and the contemporary understanding, development is a process whose output aims to improve the quality of life and increase the self-sufficient capacity of economies that are technically more complex and depend on global integration (Remenyi, 2004). The fundamental purpose of this process is the creation of a stimulating environment in which people will enjoy and have long, healthy, and creative life (Tangi, 2005). Romer’s new or endogenous growth theory suggests that economic growth is a result of the internal state or corporate system, and the crucial role in economic growth is knowledge and ideas (Romer, 1986; Todaro & Smith, 2003). The endogenous growth theory model consists of four basic factors: (1) capital measured in units of consumer goods; (2) labor involving the individual skills; (3) human capital comprising education, learning, development, and individual training; and (4) technological development. In accordance with this model, if countries want to stimulate economic growth, they have to encourage investment in research and development and the accumulation of human capital,

Definition of Sustainability

3

considering that an appropriate level of the state capital stock is the key to economic growth. In the literature different taxonomies of the meaning of the term development are found, and most often the following meanings are emphasized: (1) development as structural transformation, (2) human development, (3) development of democracy and governance, and (4) development as environmental sustainability (Vázquez & Sumner, 2013). Lele (1991) describes development as a process of targeted change, which includes goals and resources to achieve these goals. According to Thomas (2004), development involves the positive changes that society has experienced throughout history, and still experiences, while Sharpley’s (2009) development, outlines the plans, policies, programs, and activities undertaken by certain institutions, governments, and other governmental and nongovernmental organizations. Different terminologies of development are used to label nations, depending on the understanding of this term. The world order established in the politics of the cold war, for example, lead to the terms “First World,” “Second World,” and “Third World” (Potter & Desai, 2008). While they are still in use by some authors (e.g., Darnell, 2007; Levermore, 2010), others use the terms “Global North” and “Global South” (e.g., Giulianotti, 2010; Darnell, 2010; Nicholls et al., 2011; Darnell & Hayhurst, 2011; Levermore, 2008), “developed countries,” and “developing countries” (e.g., Coalter, 2010; Szymanski & Andreff, 2006) or “minority world” and “majority world” (e.g., Kay, 2011; Kay & Spaaij, 2012). Again others use the term “high income countries (HIC)” and “low and middle income countries” or low income economy, lower-middle-income economy, upper-middle-income economy, and high-income economies (e.g., OECD, 2015)—based on purely economic indicators. Other countries are labelled according to their inner inequality as such a distinction allows to acknowledge problems of certain marginalized and underprivileged groups, that are not caught in measurements that focus on the economic average of a country (e.g., South Africa). While their classification is built on different concepts of development, all terms refer to the commonality of problems faced by individuals that “emanate, by and large, from deep inequities of power within and between nations” (Zakus et al., 2007).

Definition of Sustainability The term sustainability literally means “a capacity to maintain some entity, outcome, or process over time” (Jenkins, 2009) and carrying out activities that do not exhaust the resources on which that capacity depends. Since this is a general understanding of sustainability, this meaning can be placed analogously to all human activities and business processes. Thus, according to the general definition, each activity can be carried out in volume and variations without leading to self-destruction, but allowing a long-term repetition and renewal. However, Shiva (2010) points out that the general understanding of sustainability is dangerous because it does not respect the environmental limits and the need for adapting human activities to the sustainability

4

1 Conceptual and Theoretical Perspectives

of natural systems. Natural systems enable people to live and support the outcomes of human activities, therefore, sustainability can hardly be considered without an ecological aspect (Jenkins, 2009; Sachs, 2010; Shiva, 2010). Accordingly, ecological sustainability has become a fundamental framework for considering sociocultural and economic sustainability, but is also a subject of argument in the concept of sustainable development (Klarin, 2018).

Development and Sustainability According to Sharpley (2000), development and sustainability could be in the juxtaposition, where both could have possible counterproductive effects, while neoclassical economists emphasize that there is no contradiction between sustainability and development (Lele, 1991). Sachs (2010) also suggests how there is no development without sustainability or sustainability without development. The concept of sustainable development is based on the concept of development (socio-economic development in line with ecological constraints), the concept of needs (redistribution of resources to ensure the quality of life for all) and the concept of future generations (the possibility of long-term usage of resources to ensure the necessary quality of life for future generations) (Klarin, 2018). The process of bringing together environmental and socio-economic questions was most famously expressed in the Brundtland Report’s definition of sustainable development as meeting “the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs” (WCED, 1987). The Brundtland’s definition and the ideas expressed in the report Our Common Future, recognize the dependency of humans on the environment to meet needs and well-being in a much wider sense than merely exploiting resources: “ecology and economy are becoming ever more interwoven—locally, regionally, nationally and globally” (WCED, 1987). Brundtland calls for a different form of growth, “changing the quality of growth, meeting essential needs, merging environment, and economics in decision making (WCED, 1987),” with an emphasis on human development, participation in decisions and equity in benefits. Generally, Economic growth, social inclusion, and environmental protection are three main different pillars of sustainable development. Briefly the definition of three pillars of sustainability is: environmental sustainability: focused on maintaining the quality of the environment which is necessary for conducting the economic activities and quality of life of people, social sustainability: which strives to ensure human rights and equality, preservation of cultural identity, respect for cultural diversity, race and religion, and economic sustainability: necessary to maintain the natural, social and human capital required for income and living standards. (Klarin, 2018)

Sustainable development is one of the concepts that is particular interest to policymakers and decision makers, as well as to the aspirations of many communities. A few years after Brundtland report, Dobson (1996) identified more than 300 definitions and interpretations of the concept of sustainable development. The

Sustainability in Sport

5

definitions largely follow the core of the concept set out in the basic definition of the WCED. In these definitions, sustainable development is mostly perceived as a socioeconomic system that enables human needs, but also a long-term progress toward well-being and improvement of overall quality of life in accordance with environmental constraints. An overview of certain interpretations of sustainable development in the period 1987–2015 is given in Table 1.1. Since the introduction of the concept, many international conferences, congresses, summits, and meetings have been held, resulting in various declarations, reports, resolutions, conventions, and agreements and dealing with the environmental problems. Table 1.2 gives a chronological overview of significant activities directly and indirectly related to the creation and development of the concept of sustainable development. In the table, the variety of events and activities is evident, so it is impossible to cover all of them in past years. Additionally, in the past 70 years only the UN has published more than seventy documents significant for human development (UN, 2015). Despite the adoption of numerous strategies and plans for sustainable development management, various regulatory and incentive policies, standards, and indicators for measurement and other instruments, the current problem of its implementation still remains. The implementation of the concept depends significantly on the degree of socio-economic development, the lack of financial resources and technology, but also on the diversity of the global political and socio-economic goals and interests (Drexhage & Murphy, 2010).

Sustainability in Sport Sustainability is a key issue in sports development policy and practice. Terms such as “sustainable” and “sustainability” are used liberally throughout national sports strategies, such as Reaching Higher in Scotland (Scottish Executive, 2007) and Game Plan in England (Lindsey, 2008). It is also asserted that sustainability “underpins” planning for the 2012 Olympic Games (Lindsey, 2008). Given this focus, it is important that both academics and practitioners with an interest in sports development have a clear understanding of sustainability and how it may be achieved. However, rather than providing clarity, policies related to sports development are characterized by the diverse meanings ascribed to the term sustainability. For example, in the Reaching Higher (Scottish Executive, 2007) strategy, sustainability is referred to in general terms (“we need strong foundations to underpin and sustain change”), in terms of individual change (“encouraging and sustaining young people’s involvement and development in sport”), in organizational terms (“build and sustain a sporting infrastructure”) and in environmental terms (“promoting sustainable forms of transport”) (Lindsey, 2008). Similar examples can be found in other sport policy documents. The variety of language used suggests that sustainability is, in definitional terms, an amorphous concept and, as a result, little policy guidance is commonly provided as to how it should be addressed or achieved in sports

6

1

Conceptual and Theoretical Perspectives

Table 1.1 Chronological overview of the meaning of sustainable development in the period 1987–2015 Authors/publication and year WCED, 1987

Pearce et al., 1989

Harwood, 1990

IUCN, UNDP, & WWF, 1991 Lele, 1991 Meadows, 1998

PAP/RAC, 1999 Vander-Merwe, & Van-derMerwe, 1999 Beck & Wilms, 2004 Vare & Scott, 2007

Sterling, 2010

Marin et al., 2012

Duran et al., 2015

Source: Klarin (2018)

Meaning and understanding of sustainable development Sustainable development is a development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs Sustainable development implies a conceptual socio-economic system that ensures the sustainability of goals in the form of real income achievement and improvement of educational standards, health care, and the overall quality of life Sustainable development is unlimited developing system, where development is focused on achieving greater benefits for humans and more efficient resource use in balance with the environment required for all humans and all other species Sustainable development is a process of improving the quality of human life within the framework of carrying capacity of the sustainable ecosystems Sustainable development is a process of targeted changes that can be repeated forever Sustainable development is a social construction derived from the long-term evolution of a highly complex system—human population and economic development integrated into ecosystems and biochemical processes of the Earth Sustainable development is development given by the carrying capacity of an ecosystem Sustainable development is a program that changes the economic development process to ensure the basic quality of life, protecting valuable ecosystems, and other communities at the same time Sustainable development is a powerful global contradiction to the contemporary western culture and lifestyle Sustainable development is a process of changes, where resources are raised, the direction of investments is determined, the development of technology is focused and the work of different institutions is harmonized, thus the potential for achieving human needs and desires is increased as well Sustainable development is a reconciliation of the economy and the environment on a new path of development that will enable the long-term sustainable development of humankind Sustainable development gives a possibility of time unlimited interaction between society, ecosystems, and other living systems without impoverishing the key resources Sustainable development is a development that protects the environment because a sustainable environment enables sustainable development

Sustainability in Sport

7

Table 1.2 Overview of the various activities related to the concept of sustainable development Year 1969

Activities UN published the report Man and His Environment or U Thant Report

1972

First UN and UNEP world Conference on the Human Environment, Stockholm, Sweden UNESCO conference on education about the environment, Belgrade, Yugoslavia

1975

1975 1979 1981 1984

1987 1987

International Congress of the Human Environment (HESC), Kyoto, Japan The First World Climate Conference, Geneva, Switzerland The first UN Conference on Least Developed Countries, Paris, France Establishment of the United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED)

WCED report Our Common Future or Brundtland report was published Montreal Protocol was published

1990

The Second World Climate Conference, Geneva, Switzerland

1992

United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (Earth Summit or Rio Conference), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

1997

Kyoto Climate Change Conference, Kyoto, Japan

2000

UN published the Millennium declaration

2002

The World Summit on Sustainable Development, Johannesburg, South Africa

2009

The Third World Climate Conference, Geneva, Switzerland

Brief description Activities focused to avoid global environmental degradation. More than 2000 scientists were involved in the creation of this report Under the slogan Only One Earth, a declaration and action plan for environmental conservation was published Setting up a global environment educational framework, a statement known as the Belgrade Charter Emphasized the same problems as in Stockholm in 1972 Focused on the creation of the climate change research and program monitoring A report with guidelines and measures for helping the underdeveloped countries The task of the Commission is the cooperation between developed and developing countries and the adoption of global development plans on environmental conservation A report with the fundamental principles of the concept of sustainable development Contains results of the researches on harmful effects on the ozone layer Further development of the climate change research and monitoring program and the creation of a global Climate Change Monitoring System In the Rio Declaration and Agenda 21 Action Plan principles of sustainable development were established and the framework for the future tasks as well The Kyoto Protocol was signed between countries to reduce CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions, with commencement in 2005 Declaration containing eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) set by 2015 Report with the results achieved during the time of the Rio Conference, which reaffirmed the previous obligations and set the guidelines for implementation of the concept in the future Further development of the global Climate Change Monitoring System with the aim of timely anticipation of possible disasters (continued)

8

1

Conceptual and Theoretical Perspectives

Table 1.2 (continued) Year 2009 2012

Activities World Congress Summit G20, Pittsburgh, USA UN conference Rio +20, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil

2015

UN Sustainable Development Summit 2015, New York, SAD

2015

UN conference on climate change COP21Paris Climate change Conference, Paris, France

Brief description G20 member states made an agreement on a moderate and sustainable economy Twenty years after the Rio conference, the report The future we want renewed the commitment to the goals of sustainable development and encouraged issues of the global green economy The UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development was published, setting up 17 Millennium Development Goals which should be achieved by 2030 Agreement on the reduction of greenhouse gases in order to reduce and limit global warming

Source: Klarin (2018)

development practice. Academic literature on sport does little to clarify the concept of sustainability. There are few systematic studies of the sustainability of sports development programs. Of those studies available, Lawson (2005) focuses on the sustainability of social and human development through sport while Dowda et al. (2005) examine the sustained usage of the resources provided through a physical education program. More generally, Kirk (2004) recognizes that there is a lack of research that examines the sustainability of young people’s participation in sport. These contributions typify the small number of studies of sports development programs to consider sustainability in that they examine specific aspects of sustainability rather than offering guidance as to how the concept could be considered, or addressed, in its entirety (Lindsey, 2008).

Terminology of Sport for Sustainable Development Before explaining how sport inserted into development discourse, we need to clarify two concepts in the domain of sport and development to be distinct in their specific purpose and focus: Sport Development (SD) and Sport for Development (SfD). sport development (SD) refers to the improvement of programs for those involved in organized sport, including physical infrastructure such as facilities and institutions for athletes, coaches, officials, and administrators alike (Green, 2005). The goal of sport development is to attract and motivate participants to increase their sport skills and progress through the system with the goal of promoting the best to an elite level. Sport for Development, on the other hand, emphasizes broad participation, targets marginalized populations, focuses on egalitarianism, informality or even play, and achieving social goals through sport-based approaches at the community level, and is primarily unconcerned about whether participants ever become involved in

Terminology of Sport for Sustainable Development

9

organized training and competition (Cragg et al., 2017). The management and delivery of SfD can be a little more complex than that of SD, because SfD goes beyond sport per se, and instead links to the wider field of community development. The management and delivery of SfD focus on using sport as a tool to achieve broader aims that are most often outside the scope of the sport itself. This might include using participation in sport to achieve wide-ranging aims such as social development, local empowerment, or peace objectives (Sherry et al., 2016). Coalter (2007) provides the following classification system based on the relative emphasis on sport and/or its objectives: • Traditional forms of sport, with an implicit assumption or explicit affirmation that such sport has inherent developmental properties for participants. • Sport plus, in which sports are adapted and often augmented with parallel programs in order to maximize their potential to achieve developmental objectives. • Plus sport, in which sport’s popularity is used to attract young people to programs of education and training, with the systematic development of sport rarely a strategic aim (Sherry et al., 2016). Engelhardt (2013) argues that the overarching aim of “sport development”/“sport plus” or “sport for development”/“plus sport” may seem very different, but that is not to say that they cannot work together with mutual benefits. She states: “Both ‘sport development’ and ‘sport for development’ focus on delivering quality interventions and active, planned participation on the ground. We would perhaps do well to view them both as variations of the same idea, interventions in society aimed towards the most human of goals: making life more meaningful through interaction with one other” (Van Eekeren et al., 2013). As it comes from the title of the book, we focused on sport for sustainable development goals. In terms of terminology, there is a great variety of terms used in this area, which confuses the readers. Biermann (2016) implied to these terms and the authors that used them: “development through sport” (e.g., Houlihan & White, 2002; Levermore, 2008; Darnell, 2007; Black, 2010; Guest, 2009), “sport for development” (e.g., Kidd, 2008; Coalter, 2013; Burnett, 2009; Levermore, 2011; Nicholls et al., 2011; Darnell & Hayhurst, 2011; Lindsey & Grattan, 2012; Sugden, 2010), “sport-in-development” (e.g., Coalter, 2009; Nicholls, 2009; Petry & Weinberg, 2011; Darnell, 2012), “sport for international development and peace” (Sugden, 2013), and/or “sport(s) and (international) development” (e.g., Levermore & Beacom, 2009; Hartmann & Kwauk, 2011; Meier, 2005) and “sport for good” (Darnell et al., 2019). Here we distinguished between three concepts that are more prevalent and we have used in this chapter: Sport for Development (SfD), Sport for Development and Peace (SDP), and Sport for sustainable development (SSD). These three concepts are delicately different from each other, however, they also have a very close overlap. As we mentioned; SfD has a long history and refers in general terms to the process, theories, and/or ideologies of using sport to attain positive social outcomes. The outcomes are varied and include social development (e.g., gender empowerment), economic development, peace building and conflict resolution, international

10

1 Conceptual and Theoretical Perspectives

cooperation and understanding, and health promotion. By contrast, sport for development and peace (SDP) describes the global sector of organizations and stockholders that now champion, organize, and implement sport for development programs. In comparison to SfD, SDP is a contemporary phenomenon and illustrative of the latest incarnation of sport for development as well as its increasing institutionalization (Darnell et al., 2019). Sport for sustainable development (SSD) imply to the potential of sport policies to contribute to wide-ranging development outcomes has been recognized across international policy declarations, most significantly in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (The Commonwealth Secretariat, 2019). SSD addresses broader governance, policy, and structural issues in tackling inequality, justice, and broad SDGs. In contrast, SDP interventions have predominantly been targeted toward individual “empowerment” and on delivering programmatic-level outcomes (Sanders, 2016) and less emphasis has been placed on broader issues. To ensure greater relevance of SDP in relation to the interconnectivity agenda of the SDGs, there is a need to broaden perceptions of SDP to encompass the deliberate use of sport to contribute to population-level outcomes. This will require the engagement of a broader range of stakeholders, including those with macro and population-level foci (Commonwealth Analysis, 2015).

Sport in Development Discourse Over the past two decades, the sport-for-development (SfD) sector has been one of the fastest-growing aspects of the globalization of sport (Giulianotti, 2016) and a major driver of the belief that sport has the potential to contribute to community development and positive social change (Kidd, 2008; Levermore, 2008; Schulenkorf, 2012). The main reasons that favor the spread and make sport an element for social development of the community have to be related to a series of major events such as: • The modification of lifestyles and consumption of families and the burst on the scene of social groups considered for long times outsiders of the context (especially women, elderly and disabled). • The growing focus on health promotion and care of the body is characterized by increasingly strong relationship between sport and psycho-physical well-being. • The growing perception of sport and the principles of fairness inherent in sport, which have already been discussed in terms of educational and training skills. Sport has also acquired a universal value of respect for human rights and for solidarity toward others. • The growing tendency of the population toward the sport. • The spread of associations and voluntary concerning sport. • The strong correlation between sport and the media such as television, radio, print media, Internet, and social media (Di Palma et al., 2018).

Sport in Development Discourse

11

A rapid explosion of sport-in-development projects supports this observation. Hayhurst and Frisby (2010), for example, mention more than 400 sport in-development nongovernment organizations that operate programs in more than 125 countries. Not only NGOs, but also national governments, international organizations, and locally based community organizations put great efforts and financial support into these sport-in-development projects (cp. Kidd, 2008; Levermore & Beacom, 2009), that use sport to “achieve social, economic and developmental goals” (Beutler, 2008). statements that highlight sport as the means to “bridge social, religious, racial & gender divides and contributing to lasting peace,” can be found very often. Sport was already positioned in the human rights framework from 1948 onward (e.g., UN, n.y.; UNGA, 1959, Art. 7; UNGA, 1979, Art. 10+13; UN, 1989, Art. 31), taking governments and other actors up on their promise to provide opportunities to be physically active. However, it was only in 1991 that the unique role of sport in eliminating poverty and promoting development was acknowledged (Biermann, 2016). From the late 1990s, an increasingly vociferous coalition of sport-for-development organizations sought to convince the United Nations and other agencies about the contribution that sport could make to their aid agendas. The influence of sportfor-development lobbying can be seen in the statement of Louise Fréchette, the UN Deputy Secretary-General, at the World Sports Forum in 2000 that: The power of sports is far more than symbolic. You are engines of economic growth. You are a force for gender equality. You can bring youth and others in from the margins, strengthening the social fabric. You can promote communication and help heal the divisions between peoples, communities, and entire nations. You can set an example of fair play. Last but not least, you can advocate a strong and effective United Nations. (Coalter, 2010)

These lobbying efforts were clearly assisted by the publication in 2000 of the United Nationas’eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). This publication, represented an attempt to achieve a comprehensive and coordinated strategic approach to tackling the issues of development, and was based on a more precise definition of priority areas for investment. Significantly, many of these were focused on personal and “social inclusion” issues that, in the late 1990s, had become associated with sports policy in the more economically developed societies (Coalter, 2007)—strengthening education, improving community safety and social cohesion, helping girls and women and youth at risk, and addressing issues of public health (Kidd, 2008). The latter included HIV/AIDS, which was to provide the sport-anddevelopment movement with a major opportunity, becoming a central component of many programs and resulting in the establishment of the Kicking-Aids- Out! network of sport-for-development organizations (www.kickingaidsout.net). The potential influence was increased via the appointment in 2001 of Adolf Ogi, a former Swiss politician, as special advisor on sport to Kofi Annan, the United Nations Secretary-General. In 2002, at the Olympic Aid Roundtable Forum in Salt Lake City, Kofi Annan argued for the integration of sport into mainstream development policies:

12

1

Conceptual and Theoretical Perspectives

Sport can play a role in improving the lives of individuals, not only individuals, I might add, but whole communities. I am convinced that the time is right to build on that understanding, to encourage governments, development agencies and communities to think how sport can be included more systematically in the plans to help children, particularly those living in the midst of poverty, disease and conflict. (Coalter, 2010)

Subsequently, in November 2003, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted a resolution affirming its commitment to sport as a means to promote education, health, development and peace, and to include sport and physical education as tools to contribute towards achieving the MDGs (Coalter, 2010) (Table 1.3). Yet, sport as an engine for development is commonly deployed by an everexpanding range of local, national, and international actors comprising sports associations, multinational corporations, nongovernmental organizations, development agencies, and governments (Levermore, 2008a, 2008b; Spaaij, 2009; Giulianotti & Armstrong, 2011; Hartmann & Kwauk, 2011). Its recent emergence rests on the notion that common economic policies have failed to succeed in developmental achievements (Levermore & Beacom, 2009). The growing recognition of the need for new approaches and actors has led to a recent increase in sport as an actor for social change. Political claims and initiatives such as the United Nations’ Millennium Development Goals, the appointment of the United Nations’ first Special Advisor on Sport for Development and Peace in 2001, the 2005 proclaimed International Year of Sport and Physical Education, the Sport for Development and Peace International Working Group as well as sporting initiatives such as the Olympic Aid program and other sporting initiatives were launched (Beutler, 2008; Kidd, 2008; Coalter, 2010). The effectiveness of the sport-for-development lobby is illustrated by the United Nations’ declaration of 2005 as the “Year of Sport and Physical Education,” building on UNESCO’s definition of sport and physical education as a fundamental right for all, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child’s designation of the right of the child to play (Coalter, 2010). The “world of sport” clearly responded to these policies. For example, in a 2005 FIFA document entitled Football for Hope: Football’s Commitment to Social Development, president Sepp Blatter announced a change from FIFA’s traditional charity giving to “meaningful responsible, involved and committed development co-operation” (FIFA, 2005). This document stated that “our game is an ideal tool for achieving social and human development targets and tackling many of the problems faced by society today” (FIFA, 2005). As part of the London bid for the 2012 Olympics, its head Lord Sebastian Coe articulated a so-called “Singapore Vision” which led to the establishment of the International Inspiration program, with aim to: use the power of sport to transform the lives of millions of children and young people of all abilities, in schools and communities across the world, particularly in developing countries. This will deliver the ambitions promised in Singapore—and contribute to the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. (Coalter, 2010)

In November 2006, United Nations Secretary-General on Sport for Development and Peace adopted a convention in which governments were particularly encouraged

Sport in Development Discourse

13

Table 1.3 Contribution of sport to the Millennium goals Millennium development goals 1. Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger

2. Achieve universal primary education

3. Promote gender equality and empower women

4. Reduce child mortality

5. Improve maternal health

6. Combat HIV and AIDS, malaria, and other diseases

Contribution of sport • Participants, volunteers, and coaches acquire transferable life skills which increase their employability • Vulnerable individuals are connected to community services and supports through sport-based outreach programs • Sport programs and sport equipment production provide jobs and skills development • Sport can help prevent diseases that impede people from working and impose health care costs on individuals and communities • Sport can help reduce stigma and increase self-esteem, selfconfidence, and social skills, leading to increased employability • School sport programs motivate children to enroll in and attend school and can help improve academic achievement • Sport-based community education programs provide alternative education opportunities for children who cannot attend school • Sport can help erode stigma by preventing children with disabilities from attending school • Sport helps improve female physical and mental health and offers opportunities for social interaction and friendship • Sport participation leads to increased self-esteem, selfconfidence, and enhanced sense of control over one’s body • Girls and women access leadership opportunities and experience • Sport can cause positive shifts in gender norms that afford girls and women greater safety and control over their lives • Women and girls with disabilities are empowered by sportbased opportunities to acquire health information, skills, social networks, and leadership experience • Sport can be used to educate and deliver health information to young mothers, resulting in healthier children • Increased physical fitness improves children’s resistance to some diseases • Sport can help reduce the rate of higher-risk adolescent pregnancies • Sport-based vaccination and prevention campaigns help reduce child deaths and disability from measles, malaria, and polio • Inclusive sport programs help lower the likelihood of infanticide by promoting greater acceptance of children with disabilities • Sport for health programs offer girls and women greater access to reproductive health information and services • Increased fitness levels help speed postnatal recovery • Sport programs can be used to reduce stigma and increase social and economic integration of people living with HIV and AIDS • Sport programs are associated with lower rates of health (continued)

14

1

Conceptual and Theoretical Perspectives

Table 1.3 (continued) Millennium development goals

7. Ensure environmental sustainability

8. Develop a global partnership for development

Contribution of sport risk behavior that contributes to HIV infection • Programs providing HIV prevention education and empowerment can further reduce HIV infection rates • Sport can be used to increase measles, polio, and other vaccination rates • Involvement of celebrity athletes and use of mass sport events can increase the reach and impact of malaria, tuberculosis, and other education and prevention campaigns • Sport-based public education campaigns can raise awareness of importance of environmental protection and sustainability • Sport-based social mobilization initiatives can enhance participation in community action to improve local environment • Sport for Development and Peace efforts catalyze global partnerships and increase networking among governments, donors, NGOs, and sport organizations worldwide

Source: SDP IWG (2008)

to implement the principle of “sport for all” through inclusive and coherent legislation and policies, including measures to promote participation of persons with disabilities. The Convention’s inclusion of Article 30 addressing the need for States to improve access to, and encourage inclusion in, recreational, leisure, and sporting activities for persons with disabilities, is a signal that persons with disabilities must be treated with equal respect and dignity, receiving equal rights and opportunities in sport, recreation, and leisure activities. UNESCO is confident that the UN Convention will be an important vehicle for promoting the rights of persons with disabilities, not only to education, but enable them to participate in all aspects of life in order to build inclusive societies where all children can truly be part of the game (IDISWG, 2007). In 2013, Commonwealth publish guide to advancing development through sport. This publication provides an evidence-based analysis of the contribution of sport to development objectives, and examines six policy domains in which sport can contribute to development: youth, health, education, gender, diversity, and peace building (Lindsey & Chapman, 2017). In April 2014, the IOC and the UN officially united under a memorandum of understanding (MOU), to use the power of sport to promote peace and economic development (IOC, 2014). Both leaders of each organization agreed that “Olympic principles are United Nations principles” (IOC, 2014). There has been interest across the UN system in the value of sport as a tool that could be used innovatively and symbiotically with interventions in other sectors to address a range of development agendas. We can see putting this interest into action by establishing five UN Thematic Working Groups (cp. SDP IWG, 2008; UN, 2016) by Representatives of UN: Sport and Child & Youth Development (promoting child and youth development); Sport and Gender (promoting gender equality and

Ongoing Actions

15

empowering girls and women); Sport and Peace (preventing conflict and building peace); Sport and Health (promoting health and preventing disease), and Sport and Persons with Disabilities (including persons with disabilities) (Biermann, 2016). In 2015, the United Nations and the Commonwealth adopted a set of goals to end poverty, protect the planet and ensure prosperity for all as part of a new sustainable development agenda. Known as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), each goal has specific targets to be achieved over the next 15 years. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are the continuation of the United Nations Millennium Declaration (UN General Assembly, 2000), an unprecedented global partnership to inspire and promote the principles of human dignity, equality, and equity. The SDGs are a set of 17 ambitious goals and 169 targets that aim to guide policy development and investment to 2030 with a view to addressing some of the most pressing global issues (Yelamos et al., 2019). As an associated task, the Commonwealth Secretariat undertook a wide-ranging consultation on how sport-based approaches can contribute to the Sustainable Development Agenda and achievement of the Goals (Table 1.4). The Commonwealth Secretariat analysis (2015) informed decisions by the 8th Commonwealth Sports Ministers Meeting (Commonwealth Secretariat, 2016) and Sixth International Conference of Ministers and Senior Officials Responsible for Physical Education and Sport (MINEPS VI) to design future sport policy to contribute to prioritized SDGs (UNESCO, 2017b). MINEPS VI identified nine prioritized SDGs and 36 SDG targets where sport-based approaches can make effective and cost-efficient contributions (UNESCO, 2017b). These SDG goals and targets cover diverse policy areas, ranging from individual-level health, education, and employability outcomes, to environmental sustainability, reducing societal violence, and issues of institutional governance (Dudfield, 2019).

Ongoing Actions The 2030 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals as firm foundations for international community efforts quickly emerged. The Member States, the United Nations system, international sport federations, and other stakeholders are establishing frameworks for collaborative action on sport, physical activity, and active play that use sport as a platform for achieving wider development outcomes rather than focusing on sport as an end in itself. The frameworks for action feature a wide range of goals, including personal and interpersonal social development, health promotion, conflict resolution, intercultural dialogue, social inclusion, and economic development. At the international level, Governments have endorsed the implementation of two major frameworks in this regard, the Kazan Action Plan (KAP) and the Global action plan on physical activity 2018–2030 (UNGA, 2018).

16

1

Conceptual and Theoretical Perspectives

Table 1.4 The contribution of sport-based policy to the Global Sustainable Development Goal targets Goal 3. Good health and well-being

Target Direct contribution

Linked contribution

4. Quality education

Direct contribution

Linked contribution

5. Gender equality

Direct contribution

Linked contribution

3.4 By 2030, reduce by one-third premature mortality from noncommunicable diseases through prevention and treatment and promote mental health and well-being 3.3 By 2030, end the epidemics of AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, and neglected tropical diseases and combat hepatitis, waterborne diseases and other communicable diseases 3.5 Strengthen the prevention and treatment of substance abuse, including narcotic drug abuse and harmful use of alcohol 3.7 By 2030, ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health care services, including family planning, information and education, and the integration of reproductive health into national strategies and programs 4.5 By 2030, eliminate gender disparities in education and ensure equal access to all levels of education and vocational training for the vulnerable, including persons with disabilities, indigenous peoples, and children in vulnerable situations 4.7 By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including through education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, human rights, gender equality, promotion of a culture of peace and nonviolence, global citizenship, and appreciation of cultural diversity and culture’s contribution to sustainable development 4.a Build and upgrade education facilities that are child-, disability-, and gender-sensitive and provide safe, nonviolent, inclusive, and effective learning environments for all 4.c By 2030, substantially increase the supply of qualified teachers, including through international cooperation for teacher training in developing countries 5.1 End all forms of discrimination against all women and girls everywhere 5.5 Ensure women’s full and effective participation and equal opportunities for leadership at all levels of decision making in political, economic, and public life 5.c Adopt and strengthen sound policies and enforceable legislation for the promotion of gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls at all levels 5.2 Eliminate all forms of violence against all women and girls in the public and private spheres, including (continued)

Ongoing Actions

17

Table 1.4 (continued) Goal

Target

8. Decent work and economic growth

Direct contribution Linked contribution

11. Sustainable cities and communities

Direct contribution

Linked contribution

16. Peace, justice, and strong institution

Direct contribution

Linked contribution

trafficking and sexual and other types of exploitation 5.3 Eliminate all harmful practices, such as child, early and forced marriage and female genital mutilation 8.6 By 2020, substantially reduce the proportion of youth not in employment, education, or training 8.5 By 2030, achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men, including for young people and persons with disabilities, and equal pay for work of equal value 8.3 Promote development-oriented policies that support productive activities, decent job creation, entrepreneurship, creativity, and innovation, and encourage the formalization and growth of micro-, small-, and medium-sized enterprises, including through access to financial services 8.7 Take immediate and effective measures to: Eradicate forced labor, end modern slavery and human trafficking, and secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labor, including recruitment and use of child soldiers, and by 2025 end child labor in all its forms 8.8 Protect labor rights and promote safe and secure working environments for all workers, including migrant workers, particularly women migrants 11.7 By 2030, provide universal access to safe, inclusive, and accessible, green and public spaces, in particular for women and children, older persons, and persons with disabilities 11.3 By 2030, enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanization and capacity for participatory, integrated, and sustainable human settlement planning and management in all countries 16.2 End abuse, exploitation, trafficking, and all forms of violence against and torture of children 16.6 Develop effective, accountable, and transparent institutions at all levels 16.b Promote and enforce nondiscriminatory laws and policies for sustainable development 16.1 Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere 16.4 By 2030, significantly reduce illicit financial and arms flows, strengthen the recovery and return of stolen assets and combat all forms of organized crime 16.5 Substantially reduce corruption and bribery in all their forms 16.7 Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory, and representative decision-making at all levels (continued)

18

1

Conceptual and Theoretical Perspectives

Table 1.4 (continued) Goal 17. Partnerships for the goals

Target Means of implementation

17.3 Mobilize additional financial resources for developing countries from multiple sources 17.14 Enhance policy coherence for sustainable development 17.15 Respect each country’s policy space and leadership to establish and implement policies for poverty eradication and sustainable development multistakeholder partnerships

Source: UN General Assembly (2015) Table 1.5 Kazan Action Plan (KAP) Action 1 Action 2 Action 3 Action 4 Action 5

Elaborate on an advocacy tool presenting evidence-based arguments for investments in physical education, physical activity, and sport Develop common indicators for measuring the contribution of physical education, physical activity, and sport to prioritized SDGs and targets Unify and further develop international standards supporting sport ministers’ interventions in the field of sport integrity (in correlation with the International Convention against Doping in Sport) Conduct a feasibility study on the establishment of a Global Observatory for Women, Sport, Physical Education, and Physical Activity Develop a clearinghouse for sharing information according to the sport policy followup framework developed for MINEPS VI

Kazan Action Plan (KAP) and the Sport Policy Follow-Up Framework The KAP was elaborated in an inclusive process including all relevant sport policy stakeholders, i.e., over one-hundred experts and practitioners from governments, UN, and IGOs, sports organizations, NGOs, and academia. It was adopted by over one-hundred Member States that attended the Sixth International Conference of Ministers and Senior Officials Responsible for Physical Education and Sport, MINEPS VI, in July 2017. The KAP marks a shift away from declarations of policy intent toward implementation. It identifies five Actions (Table 1.5) as catalysts for multi-stakeholder cooperation at the international and national levels (UNGA, 2018). The Actions are conceived for appropriation and implementation, at international and national levels, by intergovernmental, government, sport, and other stakeholders. Building on lead roles by the Intergovernmental Committee for Physical Education and Sport (CIGEPS) and UNESCO, the modalities of the coordination and monitoring of these Actions can be adjusted to a broader global SDG & sport framework (UNESCO, 2017a). The Action Plan and its follow-up framework are oriented along three main policy areas that address inclusive access for all to sport, physical education, and physical activity, maximizing the contributions of sport to

Ongoing Actions

19

sustainable development and peace and protecting the integrity of sport. In the Action Plan, the alignment of the sport sector and of sport-based initiatives with sustainable development priorities is encouraged and specific development areas for which there is evidence that sport has a significant impact are outlined (UNGA, 2018).

Global Action Plan on Physical Activity 2018–2030 In 2018, in the context of action to address the growing prevalence of noncommunicable diseases, the World Health Assembly endorsed the global action plan on physical activity 2018–2030, which was developed by the World Health Organization in collaboration with the United Nations Interagency Task Force on the Prevention and Control of Non-Communicable Diseases. The global action plan is aimed at ensuring that all people have access to safe and enabling environments and to a range of opportunities that allow them to be physically active in their daily lives, as a means of improving individual and community health and contributing to the social, cultural, and economic development of all nations. It is aimed at achieving a 15% reduction in the global prevalence of physical inactivity in adults and adolescents by 2030 (WHO, 2018). According to the global action plan, efforts to reduce inactivity would contribute to the achievement of 13 of the Sustainable Development Goals, if a systems-based, whole-of-society approach to addressing physical inactivity were implemented. Not surprisingly, there is a direct overlap with the 10 Goals to which sport is found to contribute most readily. In addition, the following Goals are prioritized in the global plan: Goal 2 (zero hunger), Goal 9 (industry, innovation, and infrastructure), Goal 15 (life on land), and Goal 17 (partnerships for the Goals). Policy actions under the global plan focus on raising awareness and building knowledge of the benefits of regular physical activity, depending on ability, at all ages; promoting universal access to physical activity, including through equitable access to safe places and safe spaces; increasing opportunities for engagement in physical activity at the individual, family, and community levels; and strengthening systems for implementation at all levels (WHO, 2018). The Kazan Action Plan and global action plan on physical activity 2018–2030 are clearly complementary in addition to the overlaps in their alignment with the Sustainable Development Goals. In the global action plan, in fact, the Kazan Action Plan is cited as a reference for the commitment of Member States to promoting healthy childhood development through physical activity. While the global plan is aimed at promoting physical activity in itself as a measure of health, with contributions to other development areas as secondary benefits of a whole-of-society approach, the Kazan Action Plan looks more widely at the effective integration of policies on sport, physical education, physical activity, and sport-based initiatives within broader development policy frameworks. As such, the global plan is an effective complement to the broader policy focus of the Kazan Action Plan,

20

1 Conceptual and Theoretical Perspectives

providing a deeper look and comprehensive course of action for universalizing access and eliminating barriers to physical activity and maximizing the contribution of physical activity to improving health and well-being for all, particularly those groups of society in situations of vulnerability or marginalization (UNGA, 2018).

Limitations and Risks Associated with Sport While considerable potential exists for the use of sport as an instrument for development, desired outcomes are not always guaranteed to be achieved accordingly (Kidd, 2011), and “the long-term impact of a wide range of interventions remains open to question” (Akindes & Kirwin, 2009). Levermore and Beacom (2009) fully acknowledge that overemphasizing the optimistic qualities of sport and merely documenting the benefits associated with SDP and the broader sport and development relationship can be viewed as an overly optimistic, functionalist perspective with the potential of straying into “non-empirical mystifications” (Bellotti, 2012). Coakley (2002) adds that, despite the many studies on the importance of sport and character building, a direct influence is hard to prove, the impact of sport cannot be separated from the impact of contextual factors. He concludes that sport is mainly important as a place for socialization experiences that might influence the character of an individual (Van Eekeren et al., 2013). It is important to note that not all sport programs are suitable for all development purposes. Commercial sport programs, while potentially positive economic generators, are not necessarily conducive to social development because their primary objective is usually commercial gain. Other high-performance sport programs are equally unsuited for broad-based use as a development tool, due to restrictions on who is allowed to participate (e.g., only elite athletes). This does not mean, however, that professional and high-performance sport events, federations, clubs, teams, and athletes cannot play an active role in sport for development programs. In fact, they have historically played a critical and highly valuable role (e.g., by mobilizing athletes and teams as advocates and role models, establishing sport events as public education platforms, and providing resources for community-based programs) and they will continue to do so (SDP IWG, 2008). Society’s ills can be found in sport environments, as in all other social domains. As a result, sport brings with it particular risks. These risks can have a negative impact on development aims and must be guarded against if the full positive power of sport is to be realized. Examples include the unfair exploitation of talent from developing countries for commercial gain, aggression and violent rivalry among opposing teams and their supporters, and an emphasis on winning at any cost that encourages unethical and unhealthy behaviors (like aggression, doping, and other forms of cheating). Risks such as these can undermine the positive values of sport and offer negative role models to young people. Sport programs and events that exhibit these attributes are not suitable for Sport for Development purposes, however, these risks can be minimized by ensuring that Sport for Development initiatives

References

21

are driven first and foremost by development objectives and are delivered according to the principles of transparency, accountability, and sustainability, thereby protecting the integrity, inherent joyfulness, and positive social value of the sport experience (SDP IWG, 2008). Coalter (2015) implies that academics and researchers need to adopt a degree of skepticism and to reflect critically on what we and, most especially, others might already know. There is a need to theorize sport-for-change’s limitations as well as its “potential.”

Summary In this chapter, we have briefly discussed definition of development, sustainability, and the connection between these two concepts. Then we addressed the terminology of sport for sustainable development. In the following, we highlighted the international community’s advocate for the use of sport as a vehicle for broad, sustainable social development. In this regard, governments, the United Nations system, international sport federations, and other stakeholders are establishing frameworks for collaborative action on sport, physical activity, and active play that use sport as a platform for achieving wider development outcomes rather than focusing on sport as an end in itself. This framework features a wide range of goals, including personal and interpersonal social development, health promotion, conflict resolution, intercultural dialogue, social inclusion, and economic development. More recently as sport, physical activity, and physical education are also recognized as a means for sustainable development, policy coordination between various stakeholders has started to identify which of the sustainable development goals can be linked to their international and national policies and programs. A framework led by the Commonwealth Secretariat (2015) and its follow-up framework, looking for maximizing the potential contributions of sport to sustainable development goals. However, Sport is not an essential force for, or tool of, international development but rather a social, cultural, and political phenomenon and institution with significant implications for development and peace (Darnell & Black, 2011). As Schulenkorf (2010) acknowledged sport must be integrated into a larger agenda supported by both society and the governing political institutions to make a significant contribution toward promoting cultural understanding and providing reconciliation or peace in divided societies (Levine, 2018).

References Akindes, G., & Kirwin, M. (2009). Sport as international aid: Assisting development or promoting under-development in Sub-Saharan Africa. In A. Beacom & R. Levermore (Eds.), Sport and international development (pp. 219–245). Palgrave Macmillan. Bellotti, J. A. (2012). Peace and sport: Challenging limitations across the sport for development and peace sector. Accepted thesis for the degree of Master of Arts, Indiana University.

22

1

Conceptual and Theoretical Perspectives

Beutler, I. (2008). Sport serving development and peace: Achieving the goals of the United Nations through sport. Sport in Society, 11(4), 359–369. Biermann, M. A. (2016). The power to change the world? Analysis of sport-in-development programs in Khayelitsha, South Africa and its Challenges for Research(ers). Doctorate Dissertation, University of Cologne. Black, D. R. (2010). The ambiguities of development: Implications for ‘development through sport’. Sport in Society, 13(1), 121–129. Burnett, C. (2009). Engaging sport-for-development for social impact in the South African context. Sport in Society, 12(9), 1192–1205. Coakley, J. (2002). Using sports to control deviance and violence among youths: Let’s be critical and cautious. In M. Gatz, M. A. Messner, & S. J. Ball-Rokeach (Eds.), Paradoxes of youth and sport (pp. 13–30). State university of New York Press. Coalter, F. (2007). A wider social role for sport: Who’s keeping the score? Routledge. Coalter, F. (2009). Sport-in-development: Accountability or development? In A. Beacom & R. Levermore (Eds.), Sport and international development (pp. 55–75). Palgrave Macmillan. Coalter, F. (2010). The politics of sport-for-development: Limited focus programmes and broad gauge problems? International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 45(3), 295–314. Coalter, F. (2013). Sport for development. What game are we playing? Routledge. Coalter, F. (2015). Sport for change: Some thoughts from a sceptic. Social Inclusion, 3(3), 19–23. https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v3i3.222 Commonwealth Analysis. (2015). Sport for development and peace and the 2030 Agenda for sustainable development. The Commonwealth Secretariat. Commonwealth Secretariat. (2015). Sport for development and peace and the 2030 agenda for sustainable development analysis report. Commonwealth Secretariat. Commonwealth Secretariat. (2016). 8th Commonwealth sports ministers meeting communique. Accessed February 25, 2018. Available at http://thecommonwealth.org/sites/default/files/inline/ 8CSMM%20Communiqu%C3%A9%20-20FINAL%20-%2004.08.16.pdf Commonwealth Secretariat. (2019). Measuring the contribution of sport, physical education and physical activity to the sustainable development goals, toolkit and model indicators draft for endorsement. Cragg, S., Costas-Bradstreet, C., & Kingsley, B. (2017). Inventory, literature review and recommendations for Canada’s sport for development initiatives. Interprovincial Sport and Recreation Council. Darnell, S. C. (2007). Playing with race: Right to play and the production of whiteness in ‘development through sport’. Sport in Society, 10(4), 560–579. Darnell, S. C. (2010). Power, politics and “sport for development and peace”: Investigating the utility of sport for international development. Sociology of Sport Journal, 27(1), 54–75. Darnell, S. C. (2012). Sport for development and peace. A critical sociology. Development Studies, 8(2), 183–190. Darnell, S. C., & Black, D. R. (2011). Mainstreaming sport into international development studies. Third World Quarterly, 32(3), 367–378. Darnell, S. C., & Hayhurst, L. (2011). Sport for decolonization: Exploring a new praxis of sport for development. Progress in Development Studies, 11(3), 183–196. Darnell, S. C., Field, R., & Kidd, B. (2019). The history and politics of sport-for-development. Global Culture and Sport Series. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-43944-4 Di Palma, D., Tafuri, D., Ascione, A., & Raiola, G. (2018). Social, tourism and educational development through Sport. Journal of Physical Education and Sport, 18(1(Art 67)), 473–478. https://doi.org/10.7752/jpes.2018.s167 Dobson, A. (1996). Environmental sustainabilities: An analysis and a typology. Environmental Politics, 5, 401–428. Dowda, M., Sallis, J. F., McKenzie, T. L., Rosengard, P., & Kohl, H. W. (2005). Evaluating the sustainability of SPARK physical education: A case study of translating research into practice. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 76(1), 11–19. Drexhage, J., & Murphy, D. (2010). Sustainable development: From Brundtland to Rio 2012. International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) for UN. UN.

References

23

Dudfield, O. (2019). SDP and the sustainable development goals. In H. Collison, S. C. Darnell, R. Giulianotti, & D. Howe (Eds.), Routledge handbook of sport for development and peace (pp. 116–127). Routledge. Engelhardt, J. (2013). Sport development, sport for development or both? www.sportanddev.or. Accessed August, 2013. FIFA. (2005). Football for hope: Football’s commitment to social development. Retrieved from http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afprograms/worldwideprograms/footballforhope_e_4782 7.pdf Giulianotti, R. (2010). Sport, peacemaking and conflict resolution: A contextual analysis and modelling of the sport, development and peace sector. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 34(2), 207–228. Giulianotti, R., & Armstrong, G. (2011). Sport, the military and peacemaking: History and possibilities. Third World Quarterly, 32(3), 379–394. Giulianotti, R., Hognestad, H., & Spaaij, R. (2016). Sport for development and peace: Power politics and patronage. Journal of Global Sport Management, 1(3–4), 129–141. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/24704067.2016.1231926 Green, B. C. (2005). Building sport programs to optimize athlete recruitment, retention, and transition: Toward a normative theory of sport development. Journal of Sport Management, 19(3), 233–253. Guest, A. M. (2009). The diffusion of development-through-sport: Analysing the history and practice of the Olympic Movement’s grassroots outreach to Africa. Sport in Society, 12(10), 1336–1352. Hartmann, D., & Kwauk, C. (2011). Sport and development: An overview, critique, and reconstruction. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 35(3), 284–305. Hayhurst, L. M., & Frisby, W. (2010). Inevitable tensions: Swiss and Canadian sport for development NGO perspectives on partnerships with high performance sport. European Sport Management Quarterly, 10(1), 75–96. Houlihan, B., & White, A. (2002). The politics of sports development. Development of sport or development through sport? Routledge. Isbn:0415277485, 0415277493. IDISWG Secretariat. (2007). Sport in the united nations convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. Center for the study of sport in society, Northeastern University. International Olympic Committee (IOC). (2014). IOC and UN Secretariat agree historic deal to work together to use sport to build a better world. Olympic.org. Retrieved from www.olympic. org/news/ioc-and-un-secretariat-agree-historic-deal/230542 Jenkins, W. (2009). Berkshire encyclopedia of sustainability: The spirit of sustainability (Vol. 1, 1st ed.). Berkshire. Kay, T. (2011). Developing through sport: Evidencing sport impacts on young people. In R. F. J. Spaaij (Ed.), The social impact of sport. Cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 69–83). Routledge. Kay, T., & Spaaij, R. (2012). The mediating effects of family on sport in international development contexts. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 47(1), 77–94. Kidd, B. (2008). A new social movement: Sport for development and peace. Sport in Society, 11(4), 370–380. Kidd, B. (2011). Cautions, questions and opportunities in sport for development and peace. Third World Quarterly, 32(3), 603–609. Kirk, D. (2004). Sport and early learning experiences. In Driving up participation: The challenge for sport (pp. 69–77). Sport England. Klarin, T. (2018). The concept of sustainable development: From its beginning to the contemporary issues. Zagreb International Review of Economics and Business, 21(1), 67–94. Lawson, H. A. (2005). Empowering people, facilitating community development, and contributing to sustainable development: The social work of sport, exercise, and physical education programmes. Sport, Education and Society, 10(1), 135–160. Lele, S. M. (1991). Sustainable development: A Critical Review. World Development, 19(6), 607–621. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-750X(91)90197-P

24

1

Conceptual and Theoretical Perspectives

Levermore, R. (2008). Sport: A new engine of development? Progress in Development Studies, 8(2), 183–190. Levermore, R. (2010). CSR for Development through Sport: Examining its potential and limitations. Third World Quarterly, 31(2), 223–241. Levermore, R. (2011). The paucity of, and dilemma in, evaluating corporate social responsibility for development through sport. Third World Quarterly, 32(3), 551–569. Levermore, R., & Beacom, A. (2009). Opportunities, limitations, questions. In A. Beacom & R. Levermore (Eds.), Sport and international development (pp. 246–268). Palgrave Macmillan. Levine, J. F. (2018). Exploring the capabilities approach in a sport for development and peace setting. Doctoral dissertation, Faculty of the College of education and human development, University of Louisville. https://doi.org/10.18297/etd/3097 Lindsey, I. (2008). Conceptualizing sustainability in sports development. Leisure Studies, 27(3), 279–294. https://doi.org/10.1080/02614360802048886 Lindsey, I., & Chapman, T. (2017). Enhancing the contribution of sport to the sustainable development goals. Commonwealth Secretariat. Lindsey, I., & Grattan, A. (2012). An ‘international movement’? Decentring sport-ordevelopment. MacAloon, J. (1995). Interval training. In S. L. Foster (Ed.), Choreographing history (pp. 32–53). Indiana University Press. Meier, M. (2005). Gender equity, sport and development. Working Paper. Retrieved from http:// assets.sportanddev.org/downloads/59__gender_equity__sport_and_d evelopment.pdf Nicholls, S. (2009). On the backs of peer educators: Using theory to interrogate the role of young people in the field of sport-in-development. In A. Beacom & R. Levermore (Eds.), Sport and international development (pp. 156–175). Palgrave Macmillan. Nicholls, S., Giles, A. R., & Sethna, C. (2011). Perpetuating the ‘lack of evidence’ discourse in sport for development: Privileged voices, unheard stories and subjugated knowledge. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 46(3), 249–264. OECD. (2015). Country and lending groups. Retrieved April 25, 2015, from http://data.worldbank. org/about/country-and-lending-groups Petry, K., & Weinberg, B. (2011). Research and training in the area “sport-in- development”: Challenges and demands. In K. Petry, M. Groll, & W. Tokarski (Eds.), Sport und internationale Entwicklungszusammenarbeit. Theorie- und Praxisfelder (pp. 97–104). Sportverl Strauß. Potter, R. B., & Desai, V. (Eds.). (2008). The companion to development studies. Hodder Education. Remenyi, J. (2004). What is development? In D. Kingsbury, J. Remenyi, J. McKay, & J. Hunt (Eds.), Key issues in development (pp. 22–44). Palgrave Macmillan. Romer, P. (1986). Increasing returns and long-run growth. The Journal of Political Economy, 94(5), 1002–1037. Retreived from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1833190 Sachs, W. (2010). Environment. In W. Sachs (Ed.), The development dictionary: A guide to knowledge as power (2nd ed., pp. 24–37). Zed Books. Sanders, B. (2016). An own goal in sport for development: Time to change the playing field. Journal of Sport for Development, 4(6), 1–5. Schulenkorf, N. (2010). Sport events and ethnic reconciliation: Attempting to create social change between Sinhalese Tamil and Muslim sportspeople in war-torn Sri Lanka. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 45(3), 273–294. https://doi.org/10.1177/1012690210366789 Schulenkorf, N. (2012). Sustainable community development through sport and events: A conceptual framework for sport-for-development projects. Sport Management Review, 15(1), 1–12. Scottish Executive. (2007). Reaching higher: Building on the success of Sport 21. Scottish Executive. SDP IWG. (2008). Harnessing the power of sport for development and peace: Recommendations to governments. Right to Play. Sharpley, R. (2000). Tourism and sustainable development: Exploring the theoretical divide. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 8(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669580008667346 Sharpley, R. (2009). Tourism development and the environment: Beyond sustainability? Earthscan. Sherry, E., Schulenkorf, N., & Phillips, P. (2016). Managing sport development. An international approach. Routledge. Isbn:978-1-138-80270-4 (hbk), Isbn:978-1-138-80271-1 (pbk), Isbn:9781-315-75405-5.

References

25

Shiva, V. (2010). Resources. In W. Sachs (Ed.), The development dictionary: A guide to knowledge as power (2nd ed., pp. 228–242). Zed Books. Spaaij, R. (2009). The social impact of sport: Diversities, complexities and contexts. Sport in Society, 12(9), 1109–1117. Sugden, J. (2010). Critical left-realism and sport interventions in divided societies. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 45(3), 258–272. Sugden, J. (2013). Sport and the jigsaw puzzle of peacebuilding in divided societies. ICSS Journal, 1(1), 14–21. Szymanski, S., & Andreff, W. (2006). Handbook on the economics of sport. Edward Elgar. Tangi, S. (2005). Introduction to development studies. Scientific network Academia.edu. Thomas, A. (2004). The study of development. Paper prepared for DSA Annual Conference. Church House. Todaro, M. P., & Smith, S. C. (2003). Economic development (8th ed.). Pearson Education. UN. (1989). Convention on the rights of the child. Accessed September 15, 2015, from http://www. unicef.org/crc/files/Survival_Development.pdf. UN. (2015). 70 years, 70 documents. Retrieved September 21, 2015, from http://research.un.org/en/ UN70/ UN. (2016). Sport for development and peace international working group—Structure. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/wcm/content/site/sport/home/unplayers/memberstates/ UN General Assembly (UNGA). (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. Retreived from www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol¼A/70/L.1 andLang¼E UNESCO. (2017a). International Conference of Ministers and Senior Officials Responsible for Physical Education and Sport, 6th, Kazan, Russian Federation, 2017. https://unesdoc.unesco. org/ark:/48223/pf0000259362_spa?posInSet=1&queryId=N-EXPLORE-1e2c8945-8ad5-470 a-bd86-90c1f82890c5 UNESCO. (2017b). Kazan Action plan, Outcome document of the sixth international conference of ministers and senior officials responsible for physical education and sport (MINEPS VI). United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). (1979). The convention on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women (CEDAW). Accessed September 15, 2015, from http://www. un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/text/econvention.htm UN General Assembly (UNGA). (2018). Strengthening the global framework for leveraging sport for development and peace. Report of the Secretary-General, A/73/325. Retrieved from https:// undocs.org/A/73/325 United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). (1959). Declaration of the rights of the child. Accessed September 15, 2015, from http://www.un.org/cyberschoolbus/humanrights/ resources/child.asp United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). (2000). United Nations Millennium Declaration, United Nations General Assembly Resolution 55/2. www.un.org/millennium/declaration/ ares552e.htm Van Eekeren, F. K., Horst, T., & Fictorie, D. (2013). Sport for development: The potential value and next steps. Review of policy, programs and academic research 1998–2013. LM Publishers. Vázquez, S. T., & Sumner, A. (2013). Revisiting the meaning of development: A multidimensional taxonomy of developing countries. The Journal of Development Studies, 49(12), 1728–1745. WCED, United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our common future. Retrieved from http://www.un-documents.net/our-common-future Willis, K. (2005). Theories and practices of development. Routledge. World Health Organization (WHO). (2018). Global action plan on physical activity 2018–2030: More active people for a healthier world. WHO. Yelamos, G. M., Carty, C., & Clardy, A. (2019). Sport A driver of sustainable development, promoter of human rights, and vehicle for health and well-being for all. Sport, Business and Management: An International Journal, 9(4), 315–327. Zakus, D., Njelesani, D., & Darnell, S. C. (2007). The use of sport and physical activity to achieve health objectives. In SDP IWG (Ed.), Literature reviews on sport for development and peace (pp. 48–88). University of Toronto.

Chapter 2

Sport for Health and Well-Being

Introduction From the earliest recordings of human history, participation in sport, exercise, and physical activity (PA) has been associated with improvements in health and fitness. This relationship has been further defined by years of scientific research showing a clear causal connection between activity and health status (Conrad & White, 2016). Scholars have documented sport’s ability to combat chronic disease and improve mental health, contributing to its overall usefulness as a tool for improved health (Booth et al., 2016; Kujawska et al., 2017; Naikoo & Yaday, 2017; Sallis, 2017). On the other hand, physical inactivity has become one of the most significant health issues of the twenty-first century. Inactivity is the fourth greatest risk factor for global mortality, causing approximately 3.2 million deaths per year (WHO, 2010). Consistent international data indicate that inactivity directly accounts for between 1 and 4% of all health care costs, with indirect consequences of physical inactivity on economic productivity being substantially higher (Lindsey & Chapman, 2017). Only 4 in 10 men and 3 in 10 women in the United Kingdom meet recommended PA guidelines by participating in 150+ min of weekly moderate intensity PA. It is unsurprising that physical inactivity is a major public health problem of the twenty-first century (Conrad & White, 2016). Universal and holistic conceptions of health and well-being are at the forefront of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sustainable Development Goals highlight policy actions that may use the potential of sports to contribute to healthy communities, and nurture positive social values (e.g., respect, fairness, and inclusion) through sport (Lindsey & Chapman, 2017). In this chapter, we will address a basic concept of health and health promotion, after then we will illustrate the WHO actions then, we will follow with the sport– health nexus and how sport can promote positive health outcomes, finally we will bring some examples of using sport and physical activity for a healthy life.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 K. Hozhabri et al., Sport for Sustainable Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06489-0_2

27

28

2

Sport for Health and Well-Being

Conceptualizing Health and Health Promotion Health Health is a multidimensional concept that extends beyond describing one’s physical state of being. In everyday use, health is seen as having positive and negative components. From a negative standpoint, health is simply the absence of disease. Through a positive lens, health represents a state of well-being; complete and optimal physical, mental, social, and spiritual functioning (Zwolinsky et al., 2016). Also, it has been interpreted by Bouchard et al. (1990) as a human condition with physical, social, and psychological dimensions, each characterized by a continuum with positive and negative poles; positive health is associated with a capacity to enjoy life and withstand challenges, it is not merely the absence of disease; negative health is associated with morbidity and, in the extreme, with mortality (Zwolinsky et al., 2016). Therefore, health can be considered to be an all-embracing concept; it has objective, subjective, and individualized elements, meaning that it cannot be solely measured by objective physical criteria. A widely accepted definition, provided by the World Health Organization (1948), contends that health is “a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being, and not merely the absence of disease.” This definition highlights that health describes more than just one’s physical capacity; it also relates to a person’s mental well-being, their ability to interact with others and cope in their daily lives. Three dimensions of health that are often discussed in the literature, as noted in the above definition, include physical, mental, and social health (WHO, 1948), outlined below: • Physical health: The absence of physical disease and having the energy to perform daily tasks—including moderate-to-vigorous intensity activity. • Mental health: The absence of mental disorders and the ability to negotiate daily challenges and social interactions in life without major issues. • Social health: The ability to interact with other people in the social environment and engage in satisfying personal relationships. When conceptualizing health in this way, it can be argued that sport and active recreation has the potential to enhance population health by engaging people in physically active behaviors, encouraging them to strive to achieve personal goals and providing a context for socialization (Sherry et al., 2016).

Health Promotion Health promotion is a core function of public health. It is both practical and costeffective in reducing the global burden of disease and in mitigating the social and economic impact of diseases (WHO, 2007). Health promotion was equal to individual-centered disease prevention through a focus on individual health

The World Health Organization and PA

29

behaviors, including PA behavior, which was mediated through individual factors, such as knowledge of the benefits of PA or motivation (Kokko, 2016). Today, it is recognized that people’s health, along with individual-based factors, is mediated through settings-based factors. This, in turn, has widened the determinants of health to emphasize contexts of living, as is well demonstrated in one of the fairly recent definitions of health promotion: Health promotion aims to empower people to control their own health by gaining control over the underlying factors that influence health. The main determinants of health are people’s cultural, social, economic, and environmental living conditions, and the social and personal behaviors that are strongly influenced by those conditions (Kokko, 2016). Health promotion needs often differ between regions. While urban residents often require more advanced health promotion interventions, for example, the promotion of healthy lifestyle behavior, PA, healthy eating, occupational health, rural populations—where manual labor and nonmotorized transport often remain the norm—require more basic interventions, such as the facilitation of health-care services, sanitary awareness campaigns, vaccination campaigns and the like. This highlights some of the complexities associated with health promotion action and also the importance of promoting PA and sport participation in different ways in different regions. The aims and outcomes of health promotion interventions do not differ greatly. All projects aim to enable people to increase control over, and to improve their health. More specifically, initiatives are intended to increase the physical, mental, and social health of their specific target groups (Sherry et al., 2016). Finally, the most accepted definition was provided in the Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion, wherein health promotion is defined as a “process of enabling people to increase control over, and to improve their health” (WHO, 1986). This definition highlights that health promotion is about giving people the power to achieve positive health outcomes with respect to physical, mental, and social health. When considering the role of sport within the context of health promotion, providing people with opportunities to participate in PA and to interact with others in a sporting setting can logically be thought of as ways that positive health outcomes can be achieved.

The World Health Organization and PA The WHO has long recognized the role of sport in promoting regular PA to improve health. Although not necessarily making explicit reference to sport, some of the WHO’s key policy documents have also provided a foundation for the idea of using sport as a vehicle for broader public health work, rather than simply encouraging it as a form of PA (Conrad & White, 2016). The promotion of PA and sport participation are thus important elements of health promotion action, particularly so in disease prevention (Heath et al., 2012). For decades, the WHO has engaged with the sporting world to promote healthy lifestyles and the benefits of regular PA. In 2004, the WHO developed the Global Strategy on Diet, PA, and Health (DPAS), which recognizes

30

2

Sport for Health and Well-Being

Table 2.1 World Health Organization recommendations on PA for health Children aged 5–17 years

Adults aged 18–64 years

Adults aged 65 years and above

Children and youth aged 5–17 should accumulate at least 60 min of moderate- to vigorous-intensity PA daily Amounts of PA greater than 60 min provide additional health benefits Most of the daily PA should be aerobic. Vigorous-intensity activities should be incorporated, including those that strengthen muscle and bone, at least three times per week Adults aged 18–64 years should do at least 150 min of moderateintensity aerobic PA throughout the week, or do at least 75 min of vigorous-intensity aerobic PA throughout the week, or an equivalent combination of moderate and vigorous-intensity activity Aerobic activity should be performed in bouts of at least 10 min duration For additional health benefits, adults should increase their moderateintensity aerobic PA to 300 min per week, or engage in 150 min of vigorous-intensity aerobic PA per week, or an equivalent combination of moderate- and vigorous-intensity activity Muscle-strengthening activities should be done involving major muscle groups on 2 or more days a week Older adults should do at least 150 min of moderate-intensity aerobic PA throughout the week, or do at least 75 min of vigorous-intensity aerobic PA throughout the week, or an equivalent combination of moderate- and vigorous-intensity activity Aerobic activity should be performed in bouts of at least 10 min duration For additional health benefits, older adults should increase their moderate-intensity aerobic PA to 300 min per week, or engage in 150 min of vigorous-intensity aerobic PA per week, or an equivalent combination of moderate- and vigorous-intensity activity Older adults with poor mobility should perform PA to enhance balance and prevent falls on 3 or more days per week Muscle-strengthening activities, involving major muscle groups, should be done on 2 or more days a week When older adults cannot do the recommended amounts of PA because of health conditions, they should be as physically active as their abilities and conditions allow

Source: Lindsey and Chapman (2017)

the important links between sport, PA, and health, and encourages member states to strengthen the links for reciprocal benefits (Sherry et al., 2016). In 2008, one of the proposed action to member state promoting PA, was the Action Plan on Prevention and Control of Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs) 2008–2013. Further, in 2010, the WHO published global recommendations on PA, aiming to provide national- and regional-level policymakers with guidance on the dose–response relationship between the frequency, duration, intensity, type, and the total amount of PA needed for the prevention of NCDs (Table 2.1). Finally, global action plan for PA 2018–2030. According to the global action plan, efforts to reduce inactivity would contribute to the achievement of 13 of the

Sport–Health Nexus

31

Sustainable Development Goals, if a systems-based, whole-of-society approach to addressing physical inactivity were implemented. Not surprisingly, there is a direct overlap with the 10 Goals to which sport is found to contribute most readily. In addition, the following Goals are prioritized in the global plan: Goal 2 (zero hunger); Goal 9 (industry, innovation, and infrastructure); Goal 15 (life on land); and Goal 17 (partnerships for the Goals). Policy actions under the global plan focus on raising awareness and building knowledge of the benefits of regular PA, depending on ability, at all ages; promoting universal access to PA, including through equitable access to safe places and safe spaces; increasing opportunities for engagement in PA at the individual, family and community levels; and strengthening systems for implementation at all levels (UNGA, 2018). The different WHO regional and country offices provide guidance and technical support on PA promotion and policy development to the multiple sectors, including ministries of health, education, and sports, as well as NGOs and other relevant stakeholders. Depending on cultural contexts, various policies, initiatives, and programs are supported and implemented with the aim to enhance the physical, social, and mental well-being of the citizens.

Sport–Health Nexus For decades, governments around the world have looked to sport and recreation as health promotion tools. As people’s lives become increasingly busy and sedentary, using sport as a hook to engage people in healthy behaviors—to encourage PA, disease prevention, and other health outcomes—becomes increasingly recognized and the health–sport nexus will inevitably continue to tighten (Sherry et al., 2016). While sport provides opportunities for PA and social interaction, sport participation and club involvement can also be associated with some negative health behaviors and outcomes. For example, sport participation, particularly at the elite level, comes with inherent risks of injury. Furthermore, other potentially negative behaviors and outcomes associated with sport include performance-enhancing drug use, eating disorders, violence, abuse, and athlete burnout (Coakley et al., 2011)—each of which can be inadvertently encouraged in high-performance sport contexts, given the intense pressure placed on athletes to perform. Sporting clubs often serve alcohol and rely on sales and/or sponsorship from junk food companies in order to generate revenue (Sherry et al., 2016). Also, some sports activities, may undermine the engagement of inactive people due to the relation with their previous unsuccessful sports experiences. These experiences can be unpleasant and aversive. Among the most aversive of these effects—as related to adult engagement with PA and/or exercise—are associations with unfavorable comparisons with others, emphasis on beating others, and high intensity of effort (which is especially problematic for subsequent engagement in untrained individuals). Unhappily, negative experiences of school physical education—and its conflation with school sport—often feature strongly in the accounts of people who remain stubbornly inactive as adults (Zwolinsky et al., 2016). So, while sport is considered to be an inherently healthy

32

2

Sport for Health and Well-Being

Fig. 2.1 Conceptual Social-Ecological Model of sport for health

activity, some aspects of sport can undermine health promotion initiatives, thus we need compromising to the integration of sport into health promotion agendas. Despite some of the negative potential behaviors associated with sport, governments around the world continue to call on sport clubs and associated organizations in efforts to promote PA and health more generally in the community (Casey et al., 2012; Eime et al., 2008). The delivery of sport for health is influenced by a number of factors, both internal and external to the organization. Anderson et al. (2019) explain how Socialecological factors (intrapersonal, interpersonal, organizational, and societal levels) influences on attitudes and behaviors of refugee (Fig. 2.1). Intrapersonal factors include individual constraints and facilitators of participation in sport programs. The interpersonal level is also important to the design, delivery, and success of sport for health programs. There are a number of constraints at this level, including parental expectations, paying fees for multiple family members (Spaaij, 2013), and strained intergroup and interethnic relations. Other interpersonal factors with the potential to

How Sport Can Promote Positive Health Outcomes?

33

influence sport delivery include gender norms for sport participation, the competitive, rather than cooperative, nature of many sports (Evers, 2010; Spaaij, 2013), and participation limitations associated with traditional sports (Dukic et al., 2017). The organizational level includes the physical environment (Rowe et al., 2013), such as location and availability of transportation in the area that affects access to sport programs (Guerin et al., 2003). Finally, the societal level includes the wider policy and community environment in which sport for health programs are embedded. Eime et al. (2013) imply to the relationship between team sport participation and positive physical, psychological, and social health is strong, while the relationship between individual sport participation and positive psychological and social health is weaker. They suggested individual, social, environmental, and policy factors all influence an individual’s ability to engage in sport, and in order to promote health, it is important to consider each of those factors. Therefore, sport promotes health, however, only under certain circumstances (Eime et al., 2013).

How Sport Can Promote Positive Health Outcomes? Despite the idealistic view of sport’s health benefits sport governing bodies and policymakers often espouse, the evidence to support sport’s efficacy to deliver universally positive health outcomes has been inconsistent. Researchers suggest that the ever-increasing cost of sport participation and lack of access to sport facilities has created inequitable access to health-promoting sport activities (Skinner et al., 2008). Scholars have argued that sport could promote PA and health only if it were strategically and intentionally managed toward the achievement of such outcomes (Berg et al., 2015; Edwards, 2015; Eime et al., 2015). Edwards and Rowe (2019) proposed three key themes emerged related to how sport can be managed and governed to promote positive health outcomes: (a) sport should be accessible, aligned with community needs, and empowering; (b) Sport should be adaptable and evolving to ensure the development of a culture that values health; and (c) Sport organizations should leverage partnerships to build capacity for health and promote organizational sustainability. Taken together, these themes provide an exploratory framework for managing sport in a way that may increase the likelihood of positive health outcomes among participants and other sport stakeholders. (a) Sport that is accessible, aligned with community needs, and empowering: in order to promote and facilitate PA and health outcomes, sport programs should be accessible, align with community needs, and encourage participant leadership and empowerment. Such community-led models and approaches can take various forms, depending on the organizational and participation context. Stronach et al. (2019) discovered the importance of empowerment among indigenous Australian women in encouraging them to use sport as a means to improve their health. Warner (2019) found that the program’s flexibility and participant leadership model provided opportunities to engage and sustain participation among

34

2

Sport for Health and Well-Being

men. LeCrom et al. (2019) extended this concept further in situating health promotion through sport within the context of Sport for Development (SFD), highlighting the importance of community engagement to inform the health outcomes and practices within sport programs. In their study of a community cycling project in the United Kingdom, Hayton et al. (2019) described how a sport organization was able to engage with community stakeholders to mobilize multiple assets to develop an accessible cycling program. (b) Sport should be adaptable and evolving to ensure sport culture values health: As previous researchers suggest (e.g., Edwards, 2015), focusing on elite sport development, top-down management by governing bodies, and conflicts of interest may hinder sport’s efficacy for development outcomes. In order to ensure its relevance and achieve its promise to promote health outcomes, sport needs to be adaptable to contexts and evolve beyond traditional approaches to delivering sport. This approach to adapting sport culture includes broadening definitions of sport and bringing together the concepts of development of sport and development through sport/SFD to establish more holistic views of sport management and delivery. In many ways, this theme suggests that the values of sport should support health in order to promote health outcomes. Lamont and Kennelly (2019) presented the example of sporting hyper challenges to highlight the typical market approach to sport development that has encouraged athletes to pursue physical punishment rather than healthy lifestyles, while simultaneously straining athletes’ personal lives. They argued the need for sport organizations to take responsibility for promoting broader health enhancement rather than exclusively focusing on competition and encouraging participants to push themselves beyond reasonable, healthy limits. Schulenkorf and Siefken (2019) highlighted the need for better integration between SFD practices and health promotion in order to ensure health outcomes are supported in programs. They proposed a sport-for-health model as a conceptual tool to facilitate integrated approaches to managing sport for health (Fig. 2.2). Additionally, a health-promoting culture within sport would need to extend to supporting the health of organizational staff and volunteers, with Kim et al. (2019) arguing for the need to create positive organizational practices to ensure the mental health of sport employees. (c) Sport organizations should leverage partnerships for health to promote organizational sustainability: The role of partnerships to enhance the capacity of sport organizations to promote health was a recurring theme throughout many of the articles in the special issue. The ability to incorporate intentional health goals and approaches may be impossible for a single sport organization operating with reduced capacity, when health promotion is not its primary organizational goal. As Hills et al. (2019) suggested, many sport organizations (particularly professional sport teams) may also be less likely to adopt and sustain health promotion as a goal unless it aligns with opportunities for economic or other commercial benefits. Thus, developing authentic and capable partnerships is critical to achieving many health outcomes through sport. Hermens et al. (2019) identified several necessary conditions for successful partnerships in sport for health, including partnership visibility, task management, and communication

How Sport Can Promote Positive Health Outcomes?

35

Fig. 2.2 The sport for health model (SFHM)

structures. They also argue the importance of appropriately using partners’ capacities in successful partnerships. Thus, rather than trying to assume sole responsibility for health promotion, sport organizations can leverage expertise and public health resources at a local or national level to develop health-related components of programs and initiatives. This characteristic is further highlighted in Sparvero and Warner (2019) analysis of the NFL’s Play 60 program. They found that the elements of the league’s signature health promotion initiative often ignored recommended public health practices for promoting PA. However, the potential for effective program delivery was enhanced in areas where the NFL partnered with public health experts (e.g., the American Heart Association) to deliver health-related elements of the program. Batty and Gee (2019) examined an alternate aspect of partnerships, highlighting how managers in community sport contexts acknowledge the importance of public health agendas, yet find it difficult to avoid engaging in health inhibiting partnerships, such as those with junk-food companies. The overarching message is that unless laws prevent junk-food and fizzy-drink sponsorship in community sport, sport organizations will continue to rely on this revenue source to support community sport delivery leading to potential conflicts of interest and mixed messaging related to health. This relationship demonstrates how partnerships can both enhance and limit health benefits in sport contexts.

36

2

Sport for Health and Well-Being

Potential of Sport and Physical Activity to SDG 3 Targets The Commonwealth Analysis (2015) highlights the potential of sport and PA to SDG 3 targets 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, and 3.7. In the following we addressed these targets: Target 3.4 (By 2030, reduce by one-third premature mortality from noncommunicable diseases through prevention and treatment, and promote mental health and well-being) The evidence clearly indicates that regular physical activity, including sport and active recreation, helps to address a variety of non-communicable diseases by contributing to the prevention of obesity, and the reduction of the risks of heart disease, diabetes, and some forms of cancer (Dorling & Mwaanga, 2019). Research has shown positive relationships between the amount and type of PA and the likelihood of a significant reduction in the risk of diseases such as diabetes, cancer, and heart disease (Kyu et al., 2016). In particular, Smith et al. (2016) found a particular relationship between a reduction in diabetes and leisure time physical activity. Beutler (2008) shows clear evidence that systematic and coherent use of sport can make an important contribution to public health within a range of diseases. Policymakers in the United Kingdom have attempted to address the issues of obesity and sedentary behaviors and published an obesity strategy (HM Government, 2016) which purports to look at ways in which this problem can be tackled. Commonwealth Secretariat even recommends “public health stakeholders to embed prevention as a key pillar of public health policy, and in doing so, prioritize increasing physical activity as an important public health goal” (The Commonwealth Analysis, 2015). However, sport and physical activity alone may not be enough to ward off the effects of sedentary behaviors (Bailey et al., 2012; Dwyer-Lindgren et al., 2013). Recent studies emanating from the United States, where arguably the crisis is at its most potent, have shown that there seems to be no correlation between increased physical activity levels and a decrease in obesity and NCDs (Dwyer-Lindgren et al., 2013). This seems to suggest that the problem is far more difficult to impact than may have first been assumed with factors such as location, demographics, unemployment, and access to health care considered. We addressed these various interventions to the sport–health nexus in the previous part. Target 3.3 By 2030, end the epidemics of AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, and neglected tropical diseases, and combat hepatitis, waterborne diseases, and other communicable diseases. Target 3.5 Strengthen the prevention and treatment of substance abuse, including narcotic drug abuse and harmful use of alcohol. Target 3.7 By 2030, ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health-care services, including family planning, information and education, and the integration of reproductive health into national strategies and programs.

Application of Theory to Practice

37

Many existing sport-based initiatives seek to educate and empower participants to contribute to the prevention of a range of health problems such as AIDS. Knowledge plays an important role in integrated HIV prevention efforts and is often a precondition to behavior change. Yet the UNAIDS 2016 Prevention Gap Report highlighted that two-thirds of young people still do not have correct and comprehensive knowledge of HIV (UNAIDS, 2016). Aligned to the growth of the wider SDP sector, sport-based HIV prevention (SBHP) emerged in the early 2000s. Many of these programs were based on the simple premise that sport could attract large numbers of young people and then be combined with health messages, services, and education programs. However, evidence remains inconclusive on the preventive efficacy of all sport-based approaches. For example, in 2012, a systematic review of the effectiveness of SBHP interventions found strong evidence that well-designed and well-implemented SBHP interventions can “reduce stigma and increase HIV-related knowledge, self-efficacy, reported communication and condom use by roughly 20–40%” (Kaufman et al., 2012). However, the study also found no evidence that such approaches can reduce HIV, sexually transmitted infections, or unintended pregnancy rates. The use of sport and play naturally fosters the building of relationships among young people and SBHP is often then used as a platform to ensure adolescents can build relationships with mentors too. Beeley et al. (2019) highlighted five core techniques that help coaches to maximize the impact of their relationships with young people: (1) Praise, (2) Personal connections, (3) Safe space, (4) Vital conversations, and (5) Providing accurate information.

Application of Theory to Practice Based on a review of literature related to sport participation and health benefits, some examples are provided in Table 2.2. The following case studies present examples of PA and sport interventions that were designed to engage people in PA and promote health. Since physical inactivity is a major risk factor for the development of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs), many health promotion-related sport projects emphasize: • The promotion of healthy lifestyle choices. • The use of sport as a tool to raise awareness about health; for example, through district or national health campaigns supported by athletes and sports competitions. • The use of sport as a didactical tool to communicate health-related information.

38

2

Sport for Health and Well-Being

Table 2.2 Initiatives to improve health through sport and PA Name of organizations/projects UNICEF • Nongovernmental organization (NGO)

International cricket teams

UNAIDS • International Olympic Committee (IOC)

• FIFA’s Medical Assessment and Research Centre (FMARC)

Canadian not-for-profit organization • Range of sport and non-sport partners

Nike • American College of Sports Medicine • International Council for Sport and Physical Education The Bristol Active Life Project (BALP) Skillz Kenya: An HIV/AIDS Youth Prevention Initiative

Details Right to play used sport to raise awareness on immunization and organized sport events for vaccination campaigns in Zambia against measles. Approximately five million children were successfully vaccinated—athlete ambassadors were recruited to reinforce key health messages plastered on posters and billboards Right to Play has partnered with several multilateral agencies and inter-agency programs for vaccination and immunization. In 2004, Right to Play worked with the Global Alliance for Vaccination and Immunisation (GAVI) and established the GAVI Cup—a tournament that made use of football’s popularity to increase vaccination rates in Ghana During the 2003 Cricket World Cup, the cricket teams from Afghanistan and India together promoted the national polio eradication campaign In 2004, these two organizations collaboratively produced a toolkit on HIV/AIDS prevention for the sports community and established an intensive communication and awareness campaign on HIV/AIDS prevention through sport during the 2004 Olympic Games in Athens FIFA shifted its research focus away from Medicine for Football to Football for Health, the main objectives being to use the popularity of football to encourage more PA among all age groups and to deliver health education to children in LMICs. F-MARC developed the 11 for Health program—a football-based, health education program for children ParticipACTION: Not-for-profit organization formed in Canada to act as the national voice for PA and sport participation. It works with a range of partners, including sport, recreation, PA organizations, governments and corporate sponsors, toward encouraging people to live active lifestyles Designed to Move: A PA action agenda that brings together information from around the globe to highlight the costs and consequences of PA and thus set an agenda for action. The website provides resources and case studies, encourages champions to lead initiatives and highlights valuable programs seeking public support BALP initially developed to provide sport and PA provision for people with serious mental illness (SMI) in the Bristol area Skillz Kenya’s long-term aims are strongly aligned with the Kenyan National AIDS Strategic Plan (KNASP) which aims to reduce the rate of new infections by 50% by 2015 to ensure that the majority of Kenyans who are HIV Negative remain free of the disease The Skillz Kenya program, which is based on the sport (continued)

References

39

Table 2.2 (continued) Name of organizations/projects

Details

A Golf Program for People with Mental Health Problems

for development model, uses soccer to instill knowledge and life skills in vulnerable young people to prevent the spread of HIV in Kenya Explored the contribution of PA to recovery among a group of men with serious mental illness (SMI)

Source: Sherry et al. (2016) and Conrad and White (2016)

Summary Today, when many societies face health problems with complex causes, such as lack of PA and sedentary lifestyle leading to increased obesity and overweight, health promotion has more societal importance than ever. Sport attracts a lot of people who participate in it in a variety of ways through personal choice and interest, making it one of the most potentially powerful settings in which to practice future health promotion. Participation in sport and active recreation can make a substantial contribution to reducing physical inactivity, preventing associated noncommunicable diseases, and improving health and well-being. Popular engagement with sport makes it a valuable environment for communication and education to address various health challenges and outcomes. The World Health Organization (WHO) has been well acknowledged the importance of PA and documented some evidence shows PA reduces the risk of certain chronic conditions such as cardiovascular diseases, diabetes type 2, cancer, overweight and obesity, and improves musculoskeletal health and psychological well-being, also propose some recommendations on PA for different age groups. Sport-based approaches must be accessible and inclusive, taking into account and seeking to address wider social, economic, and environmental factors that affect health and well-being. Finally, various studies, highlights the potential of sport and PA to SDG 3 targets 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, and 3.7.

References Anderson, A., Dixon, M. A., Oshiro, K. F., Wicker, P., Cunningham, G. B., & Heere, B. (2019). Managerial perceptions of factors affecting the design and delivery of sport for health programs for refugee populations. Sport Management Review, 22(1), 80–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. smr.2018.06.015 Bailey, R., Hillman, C., Arent, S., & Petitpas, A. (2012). Physical activity as an investment in personal and social change: The human capital model. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 9(8), 1053–1055. Batty, R., & Gee, S. (2019). Fast food, fizz, & funding: Balancing the scales of regional sport organisation sponsorship. Sport Management Review, 22, 167–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. smr.2018.06.014

40

2

Sport for Health and Well-Being

Beeley, P., Sanders, B., & Barkley, C. (2019). SDP and health. In H. Collison, S. C. Darnell, R. Giulianotti, & D. Howe (Eds.), Routledge handbook of sport for development and peace (pp. 319–329). Routledge. Berg, B. K., Warner, S., & Das, B. M. (2015). What about sport? A public health perspective on leisure-time physical activity. Sport Management Review, 18, 20–31. Beutler, I. (2008). Sport serving development and peace: Achieving the goals of the United Nations through sport. Sport in Society, 11(4), 359–369. Booth, F. W., Roberts, C. K., Thyfault, J. P., Ruegsegger, G. N., & Toedebusch, R. G. (2016). Role of inactivity in chronic diseases: Evolutionary insight and pathophysiological mechanisms. Physiological Reviews, 97(4), 1351–1402. Bouchard, C., Shepard, R., Stephens, T., Sutton, J., & McPherson, B. (1990). Exercise, fitness and health: A consensus of current knowledge. Human Kinetics. Casey, M. M., Payne, W. R., & Eime, R. M. (2012). Organisational readiness and capacity building strategies of sporting organisations to promote health. Sport Management Review, 15(1), 109–124. Coakley, J., Hallinan, C., & McDonald, B. (2011). Sport in society: Sociological issues and controversies. McGraw-Hill. Conrad, D., & White, A. (2016). Sport-based health intervention: Case studies from around the world. Springer. Dorling, H., & Mwaanga, O. (2019). Non-communicable disease. In H. Collison, S. C. Darnell, R. Giulianotti, & D. Howe (Eds.), Routledge handbook of sport for development and peace (pp. 308–318). Routledge. Dukic, D., McDonald, B., & Spaaij, R. (2017). Being able to play: Experiences of social inclusion and exclusion within a football team of people seeking asylum. Social Inclusion, 5(2), 101–110. Dwyer-Lindgren, L., Freedman, G., Engell, R., Fleming, T., Lim, S., Murray, C., & Mokdad, A. (2013). Prevalence of physical activity and obesity in US counties, 2001–2011: A road map for action. Population Health Metrics, 11(1), 1–11. Edwards, M. B. (2015). The role of sport in community capacity building: An examination of sport for development research and practice. Sport Management Review, 18(1), 6–19. Edwards, M. B., & Rowe, K. (2019). Managing sport for health: An introduction to the special issue. Sport Management Review, 22, 1–4. Eime, R., Payne, W., & Harvey, J. (2008). Making sporting clubs healthy and welcoming environments: A strategy to increase participation. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 11(2), 146–154. Eime, R., Young, J., Harvey, J., Charity, M., & Payne, W. (2013). A systematic review of the psychological and social benefits of participation in sport for adults: Informing development of a conceptual model of health through sport. The International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 10(135), 1–14. Eime, R. M., Sawyer, N., Harvey, J. T., Casey, M. M., Westerbeek, H., & Payne, W. R. (2015). Integrating public health and sport management: Sport participation trends 2001–2010. Sport Management Review, 18, 207–217. Evers, C. (2010). Intimacy, sport and young refugee men. Emotion, Space and Society, 3, 56–61. Guerin, P., Diiriye, R. O., Corrigan, C., & Guerin, B. (2003). Physical activity programs for refugee Somali women: Working out in a new country. Women and Health, 38, 83–99. Hayton, J. W., Blundell, M., Cullinane, D., & Walker, C. (2019). Building an inclusive cycling “movement”: Exploring the charity-led mobilization of recreational cycling in communities across Merseyside, England. Sport Management Review, 22, 21–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. smr.2018.09.002 Heath, G. W., Parra, D. C., Sarmiento, O. L., Andersen, L. B., Owen, N., Goenka, S., Montes, F., & Brownson, R. C. (2012). Evidence-based intervention in physical activity: Lessons from around the world. The Lancet, 380, 272–281.

References

41

Hermens, N., Verkooijen, K. T., & Koelen, M. A. (2019). Associations between partnership characteristics and perceived success in Dutch sport-for-health partnerships. Sport Management Review, 22, 142–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2018.06.008 Hills, S., Walker, M. B., & Barry, A. (2019). Sport as a vehicle for health promotion: A shared value example of social programming. Sport Management Review, 22, 126–141. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.smr.2018.10.001 HM Government (UK). (2016). Childhood obesity: A plan for action. Retrieved May 25, 2018, from https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/childhood-obesity-a-plan-for-action Kaufman, Z. A., Spencer, T. S., & Ross, D. A. (2012). Effectiveness of sports- based HIV prevention interventions: A systematic review of the evidence. AIDS and Behaviour, 17(3), 987–1001. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-012-0348-1 Kim, M., Kim, A. C. H., Newman, J. I., Ferris, G. R., & Perrewé, P. L. (2019). The antecedents and consequences of positive organizational behavior: The role of psychological capital for promoting employee well-being in sport organizations. Sport Management Review, 22, 108–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2018.04.003 Kokko, S. (2016). Sport as a vehicle for health promotion and more. Department of Health Sciences, University of Jyväskylä. Kujawska, A., Perkowski, R., Androsiuk-Perkowska, J., Shierkowska, N., Gajos, M., Topka, W., & Kedziora-Koronatowska, K. (2017). Physical activity in healthy, older people. How many drops of sweat away from gain the health benefit? Journal of Education, Health and Sport, 7(7), 412–422. Kyu, H., Bachman, V., Alexander, L., Mumford, J., Afshin, A., et al. (2016). Physical activity and risk of breast cancer, colon cancer, diabetes, ischemic heart disease, and ischemic stroke events: Systematic review and dose- response meta- analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study. BMJ, 354, i3857. Retrieved May 25, 2018, from www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27510511 Lamont, M., & Kennelly, M. (2019). Sporting hyperchallenges: Health, social, and fiscal implications. Sport Management Review, 22, 68–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2018.02.003 LeCrom, C. W., Martin, T., Dwyer, B., & Greenhalgh, G. (2019). The role of management in achieving health outcomes in SFD programmes: A stakeholder perspective. Sport Management Review, 22, 53–67. Lindsey, I., & Chapman, T. (2017). Enhancing the contribution of sport to the sustainable development goals. Commonwealth Secretariat. Naikoo, A. Y., & Yaday, J. S. (2017). Comparative study of mental health and self-confidence between sports and non-sports persons. Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Research, 3(5), 1166–1170. Rowe, K., Shilbury, D., Ferkins, L., & Hinckson, E. (2013). Sport development to enhance physical activity promotion: An integrated model to enhance collaboration and understanding. Sport Management Review, 16, 364–377. Sallis, R. E. (2017). Exercise in the treatment of chronic disease: An underfilled prescription. Current Sports Medicine Reports, 16(4), 225–226. Schulenkorf, N., & Siefken, K. (2019). Managing sport-for-development and healthy lifestyles: The sport-for-health model. Sport Management Review, 22, 96–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smr. 2018.09.003 Sherry, E., Schulenkorf, N., & Phillips, P. (2016). Managing sport development. Routledge. isbn:978-1-138-80270-4 (hbk), isbn:978-1-138-80271-1 (pbk), isbn:978-1-31575405-5. Skinner, J., Zakus, D. H., & Cowell, J. (2008). Development through sport: Building social capital in disadvantaged communities. Sport Management Review, 11(3), 253–275. Smith, A. D., Crippa, A., Woodcock, J., et al. (2016). Physical activity and incident type 2 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. Diabetologia, 59(12), 2527–2545. Spaaij, R. (2013). Cultural diversity in community sport: An ethnographic inquiry of Somali Australians’ experiences. Sport Management Review, 16, 29–40.

42

2

Sport for Health and Well-Being

Sparvero, E., & Warner, S. (2019). NFL Play 60: Managing the intersection of professional sport and obesity. Sport Management Review, 22, 153–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2018. 06.005 Stronach, M., Maxwell, H., & Pearce, S. (2019). Indigenous Australian women promoting health through sport. Sport Management Review, 22, 5–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2018.04.007 The Commonwealth Analysis. (2015). SDP and the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. http://thecommonwealth.org/sites/default/files/inline/CW_SDP_2030%2BAgenda.pdf UNAIDS. (2016). Prevention gap. p. 10. Retrieved August 1, 2017, from www.unaids.org/en/ resources/documents/2016/prevention-gap United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). (2018). Strengthening the global framework for leveraging sport for development and peace. Report of the Secretary-General, A/73/325. Retrieved from https://undocs.org/A/73/325 Warner, S. (2019). Sport as medicine: How F3 is building healthier men and communities. Sport Management Review, 22, 38–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2018.06.006 WHO. (1986). The Ottawa charter for health promotion. World Health Organization (WHO). (1948). Preamble to the constitution of the World Health Organization as adopted by the International Health Conference. New York, 19 June–22 July 1946; signed on 22 July 1946 by the representatives of 61 States (Official Records of the World Health Organization, no. 2, p. 100) and entered into force on 7 April (1948). World Health Organization (WHO). (2007). Health promotion in a globalized world: Report by the secretariat. World Health Organization (WHO). World Health Organization (WHO). (2010). Global recommendations on physical activity for health. Retrieved from http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2010/9789241599979_eng.pdf Zwolinsky, S., McKenna, J., & Pringle, A. (2016). How can the health system benefit from increasing participation in sport, exercise and physical activity? Centre for Active Lifestyles, Leeds Beckett University.

Chapter 3

Sport for Inclusive and Equitable Education

Introduction While the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) focused on primary education, SDG 4 is devoted to “ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.” Education has been recognized as a critical factor in supporting changes and ensuring sustainability in many years of human well-being. This goal is a crosscutting to the achievements of other SDGs goals since education is a tool for addressing environmental issues, family planning, mortality; bringing social equality, improving economic growth, and entrepreneurship; lifting people out of poverty, food security; improving health, social coherence, and political stability (ICSU, & ISSC, 2015). Established by international declarations as a “fundamental right for all” (UNESCO, 2013; UNESCO, 2015a, 2015b), physical education (PE), physical activity (PA), and sport represent an important component of, and contributor to, holistic education (Lindsey & Chapman, 2017). In contrast to a more traditional skills-drills-game format of sport instruction, learning in PE is perceived as a cognitively and socially active construction by students within a complex and culturally situated interplay of relationships (Farias et al., 2015). Involvement in PE and sport will develop the knowledge, skills, attitudes, and motivation to make informed decisions and act in ways that contribute to personal well-being, the wellbeing of other people, and that of society as a whole. There is a long history of viewing sports and PE, as part of a curriculum and broader pedagogical goals, to achieve a variety of outcomes relating to the individual and the wider community (Bailey et al., 2009; Darnell, 2016). Historically, the focus has regularly been on educating and socially “elevating” low and working-class youth, who were often perceived as underdeveloped, in need of education, at risk of doing crime (Kidd, 2008). Already in many schools we are seeing delivering PA, PE, and health-related programs in an attempt to influence and educate students to enrich them with learning experiences. © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 K. Hozhabri et al., Sport for Sustainable Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06489-0_3

43

44

3

Sport for Inclusive and Equitable Education

Toward the end of the century, the UN sought to take a more active role in the global community, using sport to promote physical education and social good, under the banner of “sport for all” (Millington, 2019). Sport and PE were seen as a major contributor to the achievement of development goals and as such has often been mentioned as a prominent part of plans across many MDG interventions. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) retain a similar overarching reliance and belief in the “power” of sport. Proclamation 2005 as the International Year of Sport and Physical Education (IYSPE), invited governments and international sporting organizations such as the IOC and FIFA to use sport and physical education as a tool in global development. In the following, the positive values of sport and physical education were recognized and various initiatives and projects have used the popularity of sport and physical education to disseminate health information (Right to Play has used sport and play since 2001 to educate and empower children and young people across 20 countries; RUN, is a NGO in Hong Kong has intertwined sport and education to help rehabilitate adult refugees and asylum seekers that have been denied access to education). The United Nations hoped that the IYSPE 2005 would generate a sustainable impact beyond 2005 and encourage all members and sports networks to start shifting their thinking from the “development of sport” to “development through sport” (Skinner et al., 2019) and emphasize the educational role of sport. PE, as one of the permanent school courses, includes a person from the first year to university education, plays an important role in educational processes, especially in the first years of school, where a healthy lifestyle is institutionalized. Kirk (2004) suggests that quality early learning experiences develop “perceptions of competence that underlie the motivation that is vital to continuing participation,” linking to the importance of a lifelong involvement in physical activity (Dorling & Mwaanga, 2019). It would therefore seem essential that the school is viewed as an important vehicle through which PA can be integrated into daily life and strategies that allow for this area are developed (Dobbins et al., 2013). This chapter provides a snapshot regarding sport, PE, PA, and their educational roles as one of valuable educational tools that contribute to SDG 4. In this regard, first, we address UNESCO and its policies related to PE and PA. Then we develop concepts inclusion and lifelong learning that are embedded in SDG 4. Finally, we follow with contribution of sport to specific targets.

UNESCO and Physical Education After World War II, there were many children and adults who had missed out on years of schooling and education (Elfert, 2019). Education was required for the reconstruction of society and economy and is represented as a notion of unity and responded to the spirit of renewal felt by the survivors of the war. Meanwhile, the allies had discussed the role of PE and sport as an educational tool. However, when founded in 1945, UNESCO was not intended to address PE (Uhlenbrock & Meier,

UNESCO and Physical Education

45

2019). Nevertheless, UNESCO represents the primary UN organization to deal with global PE policy and PE became a part of UNESCO’s official agenda in response to the activities of certain governments and the PE profession (Uhlenbrock & Meier, 2019). The International Conference of Ministers and Senior Officials Responsible for Physical Education and Sport (MINEPS), created in 1976, serves as an institutional forum to develop the fundamental strategy for UNESCO’s global PE policies. The Intergovernmental Committee for Physical Education and Sport (CIGEPS), established in 1978, represents a more operational structure, which is composed of experts from 18 UNESCO Member States elected for 4 years (UNESCO, 2017). In 1978, UNESCO’s International Charter of Physical Education and Sport declared sport and physical education a “fundamental right for all”; The 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child outlined the right to rest, leisure, play, and recreational activities (UN, 1989). Since the late 1980s, UNESCO had to realize that many efforts to promote PE had failed (UNESCO, 1992). In 1999, the influential study by Marshal and Hardman (2000) drew a devastating picture of the state of PE. PE provision had been reduced in many countries, and PE enjoyed a low status and lack of resources (UNESCO, 1999). In the 1990s, “obesity crisis” was called a major issue in the WHO after surveys indicated a global increase in obesity (James, 2008) and PE discourse became increasingly dominated by concerns about rising health costs resulting from a sedentary lifestyle and global “obesity.” Worries about this crisis shifted PE policies from the traditional emphasis on PE’s contribution to teaching ethical values and social skills (Uhlenbrock & Meier, 2018) to physical activity promotion for fighting noncommunicable diseases and obesity (UNESCO, 1999; WHO, 2016). The spread of HIV/AIDS throughout sub-Saharan Africa in the late twentieth century has led to many initiatives and sports became a central component of many programs and resulting in the establishment of the Kicking-Aids-Out! network of sport-for-development organizations (www.kickingaidsout.net). The 1995 World Forum on Physical Activity and Sport organized by UNESCO, IOC, and WHO stressed the need to present cost–benefit analyses concerning the impacts of sport and physical activity. The forum also introduced the term “quality physical education” and recommended national governments to develop guidelines for “time allotment, facility provision, curricular, and teacher preparation, and that these be adopted by education authorities” (UNESCO, 1995). In 2003, the UN Secretary-General adopted a resolution declaring its commitment to sport as a tool to promote education, health, development and peace, and making sport and physical education a means of participating in the Millennium Development Goals. Onward this period, sport has been a prominent and increasingly powerful tool for development in the international community (Hartmann & Kwauk, 2011). The effectiveness of the sport-for-development lobby is illustrated by the United Nations’ declaration of 2005 as the “Year of Sport and Physical Education,” building on UNESCO’s definition of sport and physical education as a fundamental right for

46

3 Sport for Inclusive and Equitable Education

all, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child’s designation of the right of the child to play (Coalter, 2010). Gilbert and Bennett (2012) summarized the objectives of the UN for the international tear of sport and PE as follows: 1. Encourage governments to promote the role of sport and physical education for all when furthering their development programs and policies, to advance health awareness, the spirit of achievement, and cultural bridging to entrench collective values. 2. Ensure that sport and physical education are included as a tool to contribute toward achieving internationally agreed development goals, including the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and the broader aims of development and peace. 3. Promote sport and physical education-based opportunities for solidarity and cooperation in order to promote a culture of peace and social and gender equality and to advocate dialogue and harmony. 4. Promote the recognition of the contribution of sport and physical education toward economic and social development and encourage the building and restoration of sports infrastructures. 5. Encourage sport and physical education to be used, on the basis of locally assessed needs, as a means for health, education, social, and cultural development. 6. Strengthen cooperation, coherence, and partnerships between all stakeholders, including sports organizations, athletes, multilateral organizations, and the United Nations system, bilateral development agencies, Governments across all sectors, the armed forces, NGOs, the private sector, the sports industry, research institutions, and the media. 7. Disseminate scientific evidence about the value of sport and physical education for development and peace in order to mainstream sport in governmental development policies (Gilbert & Bennett, 2012). As recognized in UNESCO’s policy guidance for Quality Physical Education (UNESCO, 2015b), all children must, therefore, have regular and sufficient access to age-appropriate opportunities for physical education and sport-based activity as a fundamental component of education, and to enable and enhance lifelong physical activity, with its benefits for all aspects of health and well-being (SDG 5). In 2018, the global action plan on physical activity 2018–2030 was endorsed by WHO in collaboration with the United Nations Interagency Task Force. This plan is aimed at ensuring that all people have access to safe and enabling environments and to a range of opportunities that allow them to be physically active in their daily lives. It is aimed at achieving a 15% reduction in the global prevalence of physical inactivity in adults and adolescents by 2030 (WHO, 2018). Today, UNESCO is “the United Nations’ lead agency for physical education and sport.” It runs several projects and initiatives that address problems corresponding with cold war politics, decolonialization, drug abuse, AIDS, and doping (Uhlenbrock & Meier, 2018) and it closely cooperates with various international organizations that are engaged in the field of sport and physical education.

Inclusive Sport

47

Inclusive Sport Inclusion is a contested concept with multiple meanings associated with the term, depending upon whom, where, and when inclusion is considered. inclusive education was initially conceived in order to ensure that all children, regardless of their abilities, were educated in the same environment, where they are supported, have their unique learning needs met, and feel a sense of belonging (Ballard, 1996; Stainback et al., 1996). Indeed, no educational goal can be considered achieved if it has not been achieved by everyone (World Education Forum, 2015). Inclusive education, which covers all the life span and covers all aspects of education, responds to the principles of equity and equality and the right to equal opportunities in terms of access, learning, and success, rejecting any segregation and removing obstacles to an active and competent participation in education (Soriano et al., 2017). More recently, the focus of inclusive education extended to inclusion as a social justice process. It asks schools to adopt an approach that supports reforms, which enable all young people to access education and social opportunities in schools (Mittler, 2005a, 2005b). Inclusive PE and sport-based activities within schools and other formal and informal education settings can contribute to this vision. Sport Education curriculum has a strong inclusive focus. Students have opportunities to “engage in the community of practice of sport as legitimate peripheral participants in a variety of roles” such as player, coach, or sports director (Kirk & Macdonald, 1998). Inclusive PE increases opportunities for peer interactions and friendships between students with and without special educational needs and/or disabilities (EASNIE, 2018). The Inclusive PE is an educational tool aimed at learning social and relational skills through coded play and motor activities to which everyone, persons with and without disabilities, have access and actively participate in the same space and at the same time, in the same way it occurs within the Inclusive Education processes (EASNIE, 2015). Magnanini et al. (2018) identified keywords of inclusive sport including keywords of inclusive education, sport, and universal design (Universal design means the design of products, environments, programs, and services to be usable by all people, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialized design) (UN, 2006, Article 2). Table 3.1 shows these elements. Vickerman (2007) proposes the “Eight P” inclusive framework (Table 3.2). He believes this framework offers a holistic approach to thinking about inclusion by accounting for the different layers contributing to the process of inclusion in PE. This moves inclusive education beyond the sense of simply integrating students with special education needs and disabilities into “mainstreamed” settings (Brown, 2016; Liasidou, 2012). As part of this process, some have argued that inclusive education should promote participation by young people through involvement and choice rather than merely positioning them as passive receipts (Florian, 2005). However, Inclusion PE does not occur in isolation and requires contribution of different layers and various stockholders.

48

3

Sport for Inclusive and Equitable Education

Table 3.1 Keywords of inclusive sport Inclusive education Accessibility and Active participation in common education setting Equal opportunities for learning and success Acceptance and enhancement of diversity

Sport Ludic and motor activity Codified rules Cooperation

Cooperation and positive interdependence

Competition Fun and enjoyment

Universal design Equitable use Flexibility in use Simple and intuitive use Perceptible Information Tolerance for Error Low Physical Effort Accessible and usable spaces

Table 3.2 The “Eight P” inclusive PE framework Philosophy Purpose Proactive

Partnership Process

Policy

Pedagogy

Practice

Understand clearly what the principles, concepts, and contexts of inclusion stand for and their relationship to children with SEN in PE What are the rationales behind strategies for including children with SEN in PE and how their entitlement and accessibility can be created Being ready to identify challenges and solutions to issues and problems you may face within a context of taking flexible approaches and a desire to be innovative and creative with your practice Recognizing that inclusion needs to take place within a context of consultation and negotiation as part of a holistic approach to PE and children with SEN Recognizing that inclusion takes time and you may not get it right the first time, but being prepared to try out new strategies and learn from the experience of diversity of styles and experiences Recognizing that having institutional policies on equality of opportunity and inclusion in PE will demonstrate a commitment to and support for the principles of entitlement and accessibility. The key, however, to any policy on inclusion is the impact it has in making a difference, whether that is strategically or at a practical level Recognizing that in any inclusive process the key aspect of most significance is the teaching, learning, and assessment activity that takes place with the teacher and child with SEN. As part of the process teachers need to adopt flexible approaches, have high expectations and be prepared to modify and adapt their pedagogical practice If individual stakeholders take note and discuss, reflect and debate on all the points above it offers the best chance of you making a difference to children with SEN in working towards ensuring they gain successful PE experiences

Source: Petrie et al. (2019)

Lifelong Learning

49

Lifelong Learning Today, learning has become more effective, and the necessity of a nonage-related learning process that is not limited to the school is emphasized (Kozikoglu & Onur, 2019). This learning process spreads throughout human life and aims for the individual to continuously renew himself. This idea of continuous learning, called as “lifelong learning,” is defined by Uzunboylu and Hursen (2011) as “the activities which enable the individuals to constantly improve themselves in the personalities, professions and socio-cultural life through a planned or unplanned training,” is defined by Demirel (2012) as “a lifelong process that ensures that everyone gets what they need with the time and opportunities they want,” and is defined by Kozikoglu (2014) as “processes and learning activities continuing throughout the lifetime that enable the individuals to acquire the knowledge, skills and competencies they need” (Kozikoglu & Onur, 2019). Various global agreements have drawn attention to lifelong learning as an integral part of development programs over the years. The UNESCO conference in 1970 was the first important step in the concept of lifelong learning that defined it as a process that enables the individuals to transfer experiences, insights, and perspectives they have acquired throughout their lives to real life. The concept of lifelong learning gained greater momentum after it was elaborated in the influential Faure report (Uhlenbrock & Meier, 2019). Lifelong learning was at the heart of “learning societies,” in which the focus was no longer on schooling, educational institutions, and provision, but on the lifelong learning process of every individual that would enable the formation of the “complete man” who is an “agent of development and change,” “promoter of democracy,” “citizen of the world,” and “author of his own fulfillment” (Elfert, 2015). This report, emphasized that lifelong learning is not only limited to a school system, it does not cover a certain age range, it does not only consist of education in the school but also all educational activities outside of the school, and all educational activities should be flexible. Studies on lifelong learning have continued and the year 1996 was considered as “lifelong learning year” in Europe. In 2000, at the Council of Europe meeting, one of the main issues was considered as lifelong learning in the 10-year plans signed by EU member state leaders (Kozikoglu & Onur, 2019). In the “9th Development Plan” prepared for the years 2014–2018, strengthening the infrastructure of information and communication technologies and equality of opportunity issues were emphasized and it was stated that lifelong learning activities would be improved (Kozikoglu & Onur, 2019). In 2015, UNESCO followed the UN in identifying lifelong learning as an integral part of its own new agenda; the Education 2030 Framework for Action (FFA), and has worked to promote lifelong learning as an integral part of the SDG 4 and attainment of other SDGs. The 2030 agenda designates education as one specific development goal (UN, 2015). It is beyond the formal institutional arrangements of primary, secondary, and or higher education to lifelong learning, making adult education, and higher education as well as technical education part of the spectrum embraced by the international community

50

3 Sport for Inclusive and Equitable Education

in the achievement of sustainability (English & Carlsen, 2019). Milana et al. (2018) contended that “adult education”, “adult learning”, “lifelong education” and “lifelong learning” are entangled activities that have differently captured academic, political and practical attention over time and space. The UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning (UIL) has long been engaged with the agenda of lifelong learning across the lifespan through its many programs to support literacy, policy development, adult learning, and education. As the only organizational unit in the UN family that holds a global mandate for lifelong learning, UIL categorizes and collates national lifelong learning policies and strategies, conduct international research on lifelong learning, and supports nation-states in their efforts to foster learning (English & Carlsen, 2019).

PE and SDG 4 Targets Sport and physical education within formal and informal education settings can make various contributions to SDG 4 and its targets (Lindsey & Chapman, 2017). These targets include: Target 4.1 By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable, and quality primary and secondary education leading to relevant and effective learning outcomes. PE as part of the educational system typically spans from the first year of school toward university studies. Thus, most states offer approximately 20 years of sportrelated education to some persons. It is, therefore, not surprising UNESCO declares that: each educational system must assign the requisite place and importance to physical education, physical activity, and sport in order to establish a balance and strengthen links between physical activities and other components of education (UNESCO, 2015a). Schools are an ideal setting for PE and promoting physical activity, providing a range of opportunities for children to engage in physical activity, including physical education classes, recreation breaks, extracurricular activities, and school sport events. Physical education and sport training are delivered by trained teachers who understand the development needs of children and youth and are focused on their whole development. Target 4.5 By 2030, eliminate gender disparities in education and ensure equal access to all levels of education and vocational training for the vulnerable, including persons with disabilities, indigenous peoples, and children in vulnerable situations. Considering SDG 4.5, Sport may contribute to eliminating gender disparities through inclusive and equitable delivery of sport programs. However, discrimination against girls and women exists within the context of sport. Girls’ and women’s involvement in sport is similarly influenced by structured inequalities that may have both universal and context-specific dimensions (Saavedra, 2009). Experts emphasized that in order to maximize the contribution of sport to eliminative gender

Summary

51

disparities, a gender mainstreaming approach must be central to all policy and programming. Gender mainstreaming ensures that gender perspectives and attention to the goal of gender equality are central to all activities—policy development, research, advocacy/dialogue, legislation, resource allocation, and planning, implementation and monitoring of programs and projects. Target 4.4 By 2030, substantially increase the number of youth and adults who have relevant skills, including technical and vocational. Target 4.4 addressed the education of technical and vocational skills to youth and adults. While high-quality physical education and sport can contribute to this target; various studies (e.g., Carlson, 1995; Al-Liheibi, 2008; Hozhabri et al., 2013) acknowledged that students perceived PE as a course could not affect their chances of getting a job and the experiences of PE lacked proper connection and challenge with their future life. It seems some part of this view is a result of traditional curriculum hierarchy of subjects—that is, an assumption that certain school subjects are more valuable than others. Furthermore, PE is being ever more marginalized and undervalued by decreasing curriculum time allocation, budgetary controls with inadequate financial, material, and personnel resources. However, to enhance the contribution of sport to this target it is necessary to develop programs that comprise job capacities in accordance with the needs and perceptual capacities of students. Target 4.7 By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including, among others, through education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, human rights, gender equality, promotion of a culture of peace and nonviolence, global citizenship, and appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable development (Lindsey & Chapman, 2017). Sport has been deemed a favorable context to foster positive youth development and numerous possibilities exist for the utilization of sport as a forum for knowledge dissemination related to various aspects of sustainable development (target 4.7). Sports competitions and events offer particular opportunities for broad-scale information dissemination among both participants and spectators. There is some evidence to suggest that building physical education, sport, and play into school curricula can be an effective means to increase the number of children enrolled in school and boost retention rates.

Summary Education is a fundamental human right and essential to individuals’ development as well as communities to which they belong, and to the world at large (United Nations, 2012, p. 3). All the reports and public discussions on the post-2015 education agenda agree that education should be core to any future development framework and that inclusive and equitable quality education and promoting lifelong learning opportunities are central to education change and transformation. Early attempts to

52

3

Sport for Inclusive and Equitable Education

incorporate PE into development discourse can be traced to UNESCO. UNESCO was gradually given a more and more comprehensive mandate to serve as a watchdog over sport’s ethical values as well as “sport in relation to school and out-ofschool education” (Uhlenbrock & Meier, 2019). Actually, PE acts as a bridge between sport and education. By fusing physical, mental, and social learning domains, engagement in quality physical education curricula exposes students to a dynamic range of experiences that build on educational outcomes related to literacy and numeracy (UNESCO, 2021). Physical education provides an appropriate context for learning, achievements, improve behavior and health, develop social skills, and can contribute to promoting targets 4.1, 4.4, 4.5, and 4.7.

References AL-Liheibi, A. H. N. (2008). Middle and high school students’ attitudes toward physical education in Saudi Arabia. A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, University of Arkansas. Bailey, R., Armour, K., Kirk, D., Jess, M., Pickup, I., & Sandford, R. (2009). The educational benefits claimed for physical education and school sport: An academic review. Research Papers in Education, 24(1), 1–27. Ballard, K. (1996). Inclusive education in New Zealand: Culture, context and ideology. Review of Cambridge Journal of Education, 26(1), 33. Brown, Z. (2016). Inclusive education: Perspectives on pedagogy, policy and practice. Routledge. Carlson, T. B. (1995). We hate gym: Student alienation from physical education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 14(4), 467–477. Coalter, F. (2010). The politics of sport-for-development: Limited focus programmes and broad gauge problems? International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 45(3), 295–314. https://doi. org/10.1177/1012690210366791 Darnell, S. (2016). Sport, international development and peace. In R. Giulianotti (Ed.), Routledge handbook of the sociology of sport (p. 468). Routledge. Demirel, O. (2012). Egitimde program gelistirme: Kuramdan uygulamaya. Pegem A Yayincilik. Dobbins, M., Husson, H., DeCorby, K., & LaRocca, R. L. (2013). School- based physical activity programs for promoting physical activity and fitness in children and adolescents aged 6 to 18. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2, CD007651. Dorling, H., & Mwaanga, O. (2019). SDP and health. In H. Collison, S. C. Darnell, R. Giulianotti, & D. Howe (Eds.), Routledge handbook sport for development and peace (pp. 308–319). Routledge. Elfert, M. (2015). UNESCO, the Faure report, the Delors report, and the political utopia of lifelong learning. European Journal of Education, 50(1), 88–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12104 Elfert, M. (2019). Lifelong learning in Sustainable Development Goal 4: What does it mean for UNESCO’s rights-based approach to adult learning and education? International Review of Education, 65, 537–556. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159-019-09788-z English, L. M., & Carlsen, A. (2019). Lifelong learning and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Probing the implications and the effects. International Review of Education, 65, 205–211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159-019-09773-6 European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education (EASNIE). (2015). Agency position on inclusive education systems. Last Retrieved November 24, 2018, from www. europeanagency.org/resources/publications/agency-position-inclusive-ducationsystems-flyer European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education (EASNIE). (2018). In S. Symeonidou (Ed.), Evidence of the link between inclusive education and social inclusion: Final summary report. European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education.

References

53

Farias, C., Hastie, P. A., & Mesquita, I. (2015). Towards a more equitable and inclusive learning environment in Sport Education: Results of an action research-based intervention. Sport Education and Society, 22(4), 460–476. https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2015.1040752 Florian, I. (2005). Inclusive practice: What, why and how? In K. Topping & S. Maloney (Eds.), The Routledge/Falmer Reader in inclusive education (pp. 29–40). Routledge. Gilbert, K., & Bennett, W. (2012). Sport, peace & development. Common Ground Publishing LLC. Hartmann, D., & Kwauk, C. (2011). Sport and development; An overview, critique, and reconstruction. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 35(3), 284–305. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0193723511416986 Hozhabri, K., Ramzaninejad, R., & Hematinejad, M. A. (2013). The survey of priority of physical education course between other middle school courses. Bi-Quarterly Journal of Sports Management and Development, 2, 73–89. ICSU, & ISSC. (2015). Review of the sustainable development goals: The science perspective. International Council for Science (ICSU), International Social Science Council (ISSC). Retrieved Institute for Lifelong Leaning. James, W. P. T. (2008). WHO recognition of the global obesity epidemic. International Journal of Obesity, 32(7), S120–S126. https://doi.org/10.1038/ijo.2008.247 Kidd, B. (2008). A new social movement: Sport for development and peace. Sport in Society, 11(4), 370–380. Kirk, D. (2004). Sport and early learning experiences in Driving up participation, the challenge for sport (pp. 69–77). Sport England. Kirk, D., & Macdonald, D. (1998). Situated learning in physical education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 17(3), 376–387. https://doi.org/10.1123/jtpe.17.3.37 Kozikoglu, I. (2014). Universite ve meslek yuksekokulu ogrencilerinin yasam boyu ogrenme yeterliklerinin incelenmesi. Journal of Instructional Technologies and Teacher Education, 3(3), 29–43. Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/231325 Kozikoglu, I., & Onur, Z. (2019). Predictors of lifelong learning: Information literacy and academic self-efficacy. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science, 14(4), 492–506. https://doi.org/10. 18844/cjes.v11i4.3460 Liasidou, A. (2012). Inclusive education, politics and policymaking. Bloomsbury Publishing. Lindsey, I., & Chapman, T. (2017). Enhancing the contribution of sport to the sustainable development goals. Commonwealth Secretariat. Magnanini, A., Molitterni, P., Ferraro, A., & Cioni, L. (2018). Integrated sport: Keywords of an inclusive model. In The 3rd International Eurasian Conference on Sport Education and Society, Mardin-Turkey. Marshal, J., & Hardman, K. (2000). The state and status of physical education in schools in international context. European Physical Education Review, 6(3), 203–229. Milana, M., Webb, S., Holford, J., Waller, R., & Jarvis, P. (2018). The Palgrave international handbook on adult and lifelong education and learning. Palgrave Macmillan. Millington, R. (2019). International governmental organizations in the SDP sector. In H. Collison, S. C. Darnell, R. Giulianotti, & D. Howe (Eds.), Routledge handbook sport for development and peace (pp. 59–70). Routledge. Mittler, P. (2005a). The global context of inclusive education: The role of the United. In D. Mitchell (Ed.), Contextualizing inclusive education (pp. 22–36). Routledge. Mittler, P. (2005b). Working towards inclusive education. Social contexts. David Fulton. Petrie, K., Devcich, J., & Fitzgerald, H. (2019). Working towards inclusive physical education in a primary school: ‘Some days I just don’t get it right’. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 23(4), 345–357. https://doi.org/10.1080/17408989.2018.1441391 Saavedra, M. (2009). Dilemmas and opportunities in gender and sport in development. In R. Levermore & A. Beacom (Eds.), Sport and international development (pp. 124–155). Palgrave Macmillan. Skinner, J., Woolcock, G., & Milroy, A. (2019). SDP and social capital. In H. Collison, S. C. Darnell, R. Giulianotti, & D. Howe (Eds.), Routledge handbook sport for development and peace (pp. 296–307). Routledge.

54

3

Sport for Inclusive and Equitable Education

Soriano, V., Watkins, A., & Ebersold, S. (2017). Inclusive education for learners with disabilities. PE 596.807. European Parliament. Last Retrieved November 2018, from www.europarl.europa. eu/thinktank/en/document.html?reference¼IPOL_STU%282017%29596807 Stainback, W., Stainback, S., & Ayres, B. (1996). Schools as inclusive communities. In W. Stainback & S. Stainback (Eds.), Controversial issues confronting special education. Divergent perspectives (pp. 31–43). Allyn & Bacon. Uhlenbrock, C., & Meier, H. E. (2018). Defining an organizational role in a contested field: The evolution of UNESCO’s approach to physical education. The International Journal of the History of Sport, 35(11), 1130–1148. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523367.2019.1612881 Uhlenbrock, C., & Meier, H. E. (2019). Defining an organizational role in a contested field: The evolution of UNESCO’s approach to physical education. The International Journal of the History of Sport, 35, 1130–1148. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523367.2019.1612881 UNESCO. (1992, February 24–26). International Congress on physical activities, sport and development. Nabeul. (Summary): SHS.92/CONF.401/LD.2. Paris. UNESCO. (1995). World forum on physical activity and sport. Quebec City. Declaration and recommendations of the World Forum on Physical Activity and Sport: SHS.95/WS/16. UNESCO. (1999). Third International Conference of Ministers and Senior Officials responsible for physical education and sport (MINEPS III). Punta del Este. Final report (ED.99/CONF.209/ CLD.11). UNESCO. (2013). International conference of ministers and senior officials responsible for physical education and sport; 5th; Berlin, Final report (SHS/2012/ME.2/H/6). UNESCO. (2015a). Recommendation on adult learning and education. UNESCO/UIL. Retrieved April 25, 2019, from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000245179?posIn Set¼2& query Id¼cb1b4cf1-4e7d-4e83-b91d-4e35be94d518 UNESCO. (2015b, January 29–30). The Intergovernmental Committee for physical education and sport (CIGEPS). Extraordinary session, Lausanne, IOC Headquarters. Final report (CIGEPS/ 2015/INF.REV). UNESCO. (2017). Social and human sciences. Physical education and sport. CIGEPS. MINEPS. http://www.unesco.org/new/en/social-and-human-sciences/themes/physical-education-andsport/ UNESCO. (2021). Making the case for inclusive quality physical education policy development: A policy brief. Paris, 2021, ISBN 978-92-3-100431-5. United Nations. (1989). The United Nations convention on the rights of the child. Retrieved from http://www.unicef.org.uk/Documents/Publication-pdfs/UNCRC_PRESS200910web.pdf United Nations. (2006). Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. United Nations. United Nations. (2012). UN system task team on the post-2015 UN development agenda: Education and skills for inclusive and sustainable development beyond 2015. http://www.un.org/ millenniumgoals/pdf/Think%20pieces/4_education.pdf United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for sustainable development. United Nations. Retrieved February 25, 2019, from https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/ post2015/transformingourworld Uzunboylu, H., & Hursen, C. (2011). Yasam boyu ogrenme yeterlik olcegi: Gecerlik ve guvenirlik calismasi. Hacettepe Universitesi Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi, 41, 449–460. http://dergipark.org.tr/ tr/download/article-file/87418 Vickerman, P. (2007). Teaching physical education to children with special educational needs. Routledge. WHO. (2016). Report of the commission on ending childhood obesity. WHO. WHO. (2018). Global action plan on physical activity. WHO. World Education Forum. (2015). Incheon declaration: Education 2030: Towards inclusive and equitable quality education and lifelong learning for all. Retrieved from https://en.unesco.org/ world-education-forum-2015/incheon-declaration

Chapter 4

Sport for Gender Equality and Empowerment

Introduction There are many reasons for girls and women to participate in sports, not only from a health perspective but also from an individual and societal perspective. Female involvement in sport has the power to upend what is seen/presented as “normal” and become a major force for social change beyond sport by challenging gender norms. There is a sense of the potential in using sport to address some of the inequalities and injustices faced by girls and women within and beyond sport. For many, women’s sporting achievements are a vindication of a struggle, showing power and presence (Saavedra, 2009). The movements for gender equality in/through sport have interconnected with the international development movements. The international community, broad policy statements and declarations, and sports community itself, support the potential of sport as a fuel for change and to address objectives such as empowerment of girls and women, gender equality as well as gender-based violence by harnessing the popular appeal and inherent properties of sport (Petry & Kroner, 2019). According to Handy and Kassa (2004), gender equality plays a key role in adopting a holistic and sustainable approach to social and economic developments. The goal of gender equality in both the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) provided structure for organizations to promote sport-based initiatives for girls and women (UNOSDP, 2019). Gender issues are more broadly acknowledged throughout the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development with particular targets related to women and girls (Lindsey & Chapman, 2017). The related Sport and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) suggest that sport “can contribute to the elimination of discrimination against women and girls by empowering individuals, particularly women, and equipping them with knowledge and skills needed to progress in society” (McDonald, 2019). SDG 5-Gender Equality, underlies its importance and highlights its cross-sectorial significance for all the other goals. Zero poverty, health and well-being, environment, © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 K. Hozhabri et al., Sport for Sustainable Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06489-0_4

55

56

4

Sport for Gender Equality and Empowerment

quality education for all, or any of the other goals will not be achieved without specific attention to gender equality (De Soysa & Zipp, 2019). Many changes have been made to the structure of sport to address inequalities and gender discrimination within sport. Simultaneously abundant sport-based initiatives, SDP programs, and projects have been used to positive effect to promote gender equality and contribute to the empowerment of women and girls. Many of these programs involved large numbers of young girls and women and were delivered at a low cost. However, to know more about gender equality and SDG 5 targets, we need to be familiar and understand the basic concepts in this field. Then we will address international community efforts to involve sport in gender issues. We will follow with contribution of sport interventions to gender equality. Finally, the chapter ends with the details about SDG 5 targets and contribution of sport to these targets.

Concepts and Definitions The concept of women’s empowerment emerged from several important critiques and debates generated by the women’s movement throughout the world during the 1980s, when feminists, particularly in the Third World, were increasingly discontent with the largely apolitical and economistic “WID,1” “WAD,2” and “GAD3” models in prevailing development interventions. By the beginning of the 1990s, empowerment held pride of place in development jargon. Although it was applied in a broad range of social-change processes, there is little doubt that the term was most widely used with reference to women and gender equality (Batliwala, 2007). In the literature, there is considerable diversity in the emphases, agendas, and terminology used to discuss women’s empowerment. For example, it is not always clear whether authors who are using terms such as “women’s empowerment,” “female autonomy,” or “women’s status” are referring to similar or different concepts. Despite the similar concepts underlying many of these terms, the concept of women’s empowerment can be distinguished from others by two essential elements. The first is that of process (Kabeer, 2001; Oxaal & Baden, 1997). None of the other concepts explicitly encompasses a progression from one state (gender inequality) to another (gender equality). The second element is agency—in other words, women themselves must be significant actors in the process of change that is being described or measured (Malhotra, 2003). A definition proposed by Kabeer (2001) includes both the process and the agency elements. She defines empowerment as “The expansion in people’s ability to make strategic life choices in a context where this ability was previously denied to them.”

1

Women in Development. Women and Development. 3 Gender and Development. 2

Concepts and Definitions

57

Another concept inserted in SDG 5 is “gender equality.” Gender equality is a human rights principle, a precondition for sustainable, people-centered development, and it is a goal in and of itself. UNESCO’s vision of gender equality is in line with relevant international instruments such as the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action. For UNESCO (2019), gender equality refers to the equal rights, responsibilities, and opportunities of women and men and girls and boys. It implies that the interests, needs, and priorities of both women and men are taken into consideration, recognizing the diversity of different groups of women and men. The recent policy research report by the World Bank (2001) employs the term “gender equality,” which it defines in terms of equality under the law, equality of opportunity (including equality of rewards for work and equality in access to human capital and other productive resources that enable opportunity), and equality of voice (the ability to influence and contribute to the development process). The future concept of gender equality has to be based on the principles of building a learning environment for all partners within a development cooperation process (Petry & Kroner, 2019). Here we need to distinguish between gender equality and gender equity. Gender equality implies “equivalence in life outcomes for women and men, recognizing their different needs and interests, and requiring a redistribution of power and resources.” Gender equity “recognizes that women and men have different needs, preferences, and interests and that equality of outcomes may necessitate different treatment of men and women” (Reeves & Baden, 2000). Gender equality is equal treatment of women and men in laws and policies with equal access to resources and services whereas gender equity denotes fairness and justice in the distribution of opportunities, responsibilities, and benefits available to men and women, and the strategies and processes used to achieve gender equality (UNFPA, 2017). For example, a balanced gender ratio on a board of directors reflects gender equality. In contrast, gender equity is focused on the policies and processes to ensure fairness to meet the possible different needs of women and men. Therefore, a focus on gender equity requires an exploration of what men and women think and do and the practices they engage in to bring about changes (Martin, 2003). Sotiriadou et al. (2017) maintained that both gender equality and gender equity (i.e., leadership role redistribution and cultural transformation, respectively) are essential to better understand and redress gender injustice and for the research to move forward. The notion of gender justice is also common in the literature. Fraser (2007) defines gender justice in terms of “participatory parity,” that is, material and cultural equality for women. Gender injustice results when women are denied participatory parity by being culturally devalued and economically marginalized. For a society to be considered genuinely democratic, therefore, Fraser argues that women need to be culturally and economically included. As Fraser (2008) explains, gender justice, and hence democracy, requires social arrangements that permit all members to participate in social interaction on a par with one another. So that means they must be able to participate as peers in all the major forms of social interaction: whether it is

58

4 Sport for Gender Equality and Empowerment

politics, whether it is the labor market, whether it is family life, and so on. And parity of participation is quite demanding. It is not enough that there be simply the absence of legal discrimination; it means that you have all the effective conditions for really being able to participate. Travers and Fraser (2008) believe in order to increase gender justice in and through sport we should: • Replace the current institutional structure of sport with noncompetitive, nonhierarchical celebrations of physicality (radical feminist). • Focus on and support elite women athletes as gender troubling figures and hence agents of change (third wave). • Entirely eliminate sex as an organizational category (postmodern feminist). • Eliminate male-only sporting spaces while maintaining sporting spaces for girls and women (liberal feminist; queer).

International Community Efforts to Gender Equality The first international sport-related declaration in relation to gender equality was developed in 1994; Known as the Brighton Declaration (IWG, 1994). The conference hosted by the former British Sports Council and supported by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) brought together approximately 280 delegates from over 80 countries. The aim of this and subsequent conference legacies was to accelerate change in sporting culture, including gender equality in sport leadership (Adriaanse & Claringbould, 2016). The outcome of the conference was the formation of the International Working Group on Women and Sport (IWG). The aims of the IWG has been to monitor the progress made in advancing the status of women in sport. As Hargreaves (2000) points out, ‘the Brighton Conference and Declaration of 1994 provided a channel of empowerment for women working for female sport in countries with a wide geographic spread’ (De Soysa & Zipp, 2019). The Brighton Declaration invites “governmental, nongovernmental organizations and all those institutions involved in sport to apply the principles set out in the Declaration by developing appropriate policies, structures, and mechanisms which: • Ensure that all women and girls have the opportunity to participate in sport in a safe and supportive environment which preserves the rights, dignity, and respect of the individual. • Increase the involvement of women in sport at all levels and in all functions and roles. • Ensure that the knowledge, experiences, and values of women contribute to the development of sport. • Promote the recognition by women of the intrinsic value of sport and its contribution. • To personal development and healthy lifestyle” (WSI, 2019).

International Community Efforts to Gender Equality

59

Four years later, in 1998, the second world conference on women and sport was held in Windhoek, Namibia, with the theme Reaching out for change. A total of 400 delegates from 74 countries adopted the Windhoek Call for Action (IWG, 1998). The Windhoek Call for Action reaffirmed the principles of the Brighton Declaration. The advent of the United Nations’ Millennium Development Goals (MDG) in 2000 marked a concerted attempt to use sport as a tool of development while also addressing gender-specific aims. The broader MDG project was designed to “eradicate poverty, hunger, and disease as well as to promote gender equality, health, education and environmental sustainability on a global scale” (Hancock et al., 2013). The Third World Conference on Women and Sport held in Montreal, Canada, in 2002. The conference theme was Investing in change and 550 participants from 97 countries endorsed its legacy, the Montreal Tool Kit (IWG, 2002). In 2006, 700 participants from 74 countries gathered for the fourth world conference on women and sport in Kumamoto, Japan, under the theme Participating in change. It was the first time the world conference had been held in Asia. The issue of women in sport governance was revisited at the fifth world conference on women and sport held in Sydney in 2010, which attracted 500 participants from 60 countries. The theme of the conference was Play think change, which reflected a clear shift in its approach. Previous world conferences were mainly targeted at policy and decision makers in sport, but this time both practitioners (Play) and researchers (Think) were brought together to discuss progress in the global women’s sport movement and ways to address the challenges ahead (Change). In 2014, participants gathered in Helsinki to celebrate its 20th anniversary at the sixth World conference on women and sport. The 7th International Working Group (IWG) on Women and Sport Conference was held in Gaborone, Botswana, the overall theme was: “Determine the future. Be part of the change” and in 2022, it will be the turn of Auckland (New Zealand). In parallel, IOC also stepped more firmly into the gender equality movement by creating the IOC Women and Sport Working Group and support of UN declarations. In 1996, the first IOC World Conference on Women and Sport was organized in Lausanne, Switzerland. In 2010, the first UN-IOC Forum entitled “The Importance of Partnership” affirmed, “the importance of sport as a vehicle for the achievement of gender equality” and to strive to increase women in leadership positions within the Olympic Committee and the wider world of sport (Olympic.org, 2019a: 4). In April 2014, an agreement was signed between the UN and the IOC to strengthen collaboration at the very highest level. That same year, in December 2014, the IOC adopted its Agenda 2020, which is its “strategic roadmap for the future of the Olympic Movement” (Olympic.org, 2019b). The Olympic Agenda 2020 (and now postponed to 2022 because of Corona Virus pandemic) states its gender equality plans as follows: 1. The IOC to work with the International Federations to achieve 50% female participation in the Olympic Games and to stimulate women’s participation and involvement in sport by creating more participation opportunities at the Olympic Games.

60

4

Sport for Gender Equality and Empowerment

2. The IOC to encourage the inclusion of mixed-gender team events (De Soysa & Zipp, 2019). Three years later, in 2017, the IOC approved a major review to study gender equality within the Olympic movement to be carried out by the IOC’s Women in Sport and Athletes. The purposes of this initiative was to establish recommendations to improve gender equality, and to highlight best practices. As research showed, despite the increased participation of women athletes in the Olympics, greater representation of women in the IOC and significant improvements in policy, leadership, advocacy, and participation for women in sport; outside of the Olympics gains for sporting women have been uneven globally and still are not fully on par with the participation and leadership opportunities for men in sport (Donnelly & Donnelly, 2013; Lenskjy, 2012). As the leader of the Olympic Movement, the IOC has an important responsibility to take action when it comes to gender equality—a basic human right of profound importance and a fundamental principle of the Olympic Charter (Olympic.org, 2019c). The International Olympic Committee (IOC) has publicly announced its commitment toward strengthening gender equality, which it hopes to achieve before Paris 2024.

Sport Interventions and Gender Equality The role of gender in sport as it is understood and practiced today is linked with the rise of concerns with the physicality of general population. Studies have shown that better education and empowerment of girls and women reduce poverty, promote health and family, reduce the birth rate, and lead to better human resources (Tembon & Fort, 2008). In the past few years, the sport and gender debate has moved away from “gender equality in sport” toward “sport for gender equality.” Instead of merely promoting the participation of women in sport, the aim is to define gender equality as the goal of international sport for development initiatives (Saavedra, 2005). This indicates that the specific needs of girls and women need to be seen and taken into account in a cultural context. Although gender equality in sport is a complex issue that needs to be addressed, sport for gender equality also is a matter of controversy for many researchers as Saavedra (2009) acknowledged, “seeking to equality and empower females through sport is somewhat paradoxical given that the world of sport can be a bastion for male privilege and power, an important arena for asserting a particular kind of male dominance over women.” Also, cultural norms give into consideration when dealing with gender equality through sport. The gender empowerment is not achievable via participation within sport readily, even when this is combined with educative elements; this is due to the strength of existing patriarchal structures and the extreme disruption of the existing social order that is required for major changes

Sport Interventions and Gender Equality

61

to occur. Generally, sport interventions may not easily disrupt the deeply entrenched nature of hegemonic gender relations within context (Saavedra, 2009). Existing research, therefore, presents a mixed picture of the relationship between gender development goals and sports initiatives. Through sport-based interventions focusing on gender, programs can help individuals claim their own space, provide structure, educational lessons, safety, role models, and incentives to create meaningful outcomes for those they serve (Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (2005). Sport has been demonstrated to help some women achieve empowerment and use their bodies to challenge sexual stereotypes and patriarchal control of women’s bodies (Kay & Jeanes, 2010). Petry and Kroner (2019) discuss the participation of sport in gender equality and women’s empowerment at three levels: “At the individual level, sports-based interventions are particularly suitable for enhancing access to health education. These educations providing information about gender issues such as bodily functions and sexual and reproductive health, giving women and girls more control over their own bodies and lives; that will result to lower the rate of teenage pregnancies, and thereby prolonging the school attendance of girls. At structural and cultural levels, organizations working with sport, facilitate the participation of girls and women in civil society.” As Talbot (1989) suggests, participating in sport can be a liberating experience for female athletes. It acts as a subculture that challenges traditional expectations that women should take responsibility for “female tasks” (Kay & Jeanes, 2010). Saavedra (2005) argues that the participation of girls and women in sport could lead to a universal, transformative process that frees young girls and women from traditional values and can change general “ideas of normality” in relation to gender and the gender balance. Beutler (2008) added that social settings can be changed when women prove their sporting ability and call traditional views into question. Meier (2005) confirms that sport has the potential to promote networking, social skills, and the capacity to shatter stereotype expectations and to call sociocultural role behavior into question. Although the discourse of sport for equality has become dominant discourse on gender issues recently but, achieving gender equality depends on developing appropriate opportunities for the involvement of girls and women within sport. Women participating in sport frequently face obstacles such as socio-economic, sociocultural, and infrastructure-related barriers, safety problems, lack of female role models, as well as male and female ideals, which are part and parcel of sport (Meier, 2005; Pelak, 2006). The movement for gender equality in sport has now interconnected with the international development movement and IOC has taken effective steps in this regard; more in the form of increasing the number of female participants. However, a simple quantitative increase of women in sport, does not automatically foster gender equity or female empowerment as these are both outcomes and processes. Therefore, just “adding women” and raising the number are a shortsighted and even counterproductive solutions. They remain invisible and irrelevant, if they are not seriously covered by the media, not allowed to speak out, or not in charge of key domains (Yancey et al., 2002; Vescio et al., 2005).

62

4

Sport for Gender Equality and Empowerment

Contribution of Sport to SDG 5 Targets The adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) signaled the replacement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in September 2015, introducing a new, global development agenda. The international community has put gender equality and women’s empowerment at the center of the Sustainable Development Agenda, recognizing that those will make a crucial contribution to progress across all goals and targets (Commonwealth, 2015). SDG 5 explicitly refers to the aspect of gender (“Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls”) while calling for equal opportunities for women and girls in all areas. It mentions a number of legal violations that tend to affect girls and women, in particular, violence and forced marriage. SDG5 include also ensuring women’s full and effective participation and equal opportunities for leadership at all levels of decision-making in political, economic, and public life. The value of using sport-based approaches to contribute to gender equality and empowering women and girls is an important focus across a number of sport initiatives. Here, we are going to imply the potential of sport-based approaches in contributing to the specific SDG 5 targets that include: Target 5.1 End all forms of discrimination against all women and girls everywhere. Enhancing equality and equity for girls and women within sport can challenge broader discriminatory norms and, in so doing, strengthen all efforts toward target 5.1 (Lindsey & Chapman, 2017). At the same time, there is increasing recognition of existing inequality and gender-based discrimination in many sporting contexts (Commonwealth, 2015). These discriminations include inequalities in the range of actions from inequalities in the reward and recreation for elite performers to the number of women on the governing boards of international sport organizations and less media coverage in comparison to men’s sport. This dichotomy, intensify efforts to boost gender equality and women’s empowerment in all sporting contexts. Fair access to health care and education are the most important prerequisites for reducing gender-based inequalities and changing sociocultural gender norms (Petry & Kroner, 2019). Sport-based initiatives also can be conducted for gender education and advancement of the health goals (we see how SDG 5 is intertwined with SDG 3 and SDG 4 that we discussed in previous chapters). Achieving gender equality also depends on developing appropriate opportunities for the involvement of girls and women in sport. It is important to institute safeguard participation of women and girls from harm and gender-based discrimination in sporting context. Approaches must address both specific barriers that impede girls’ and women’s participation in sport and the often complex intersections of gender-specific issues and other markers of disadvantage, such as disability, ethnicity, and socio-economic status (Jeanes et al., 2016). Target 5.5 Ensure women’s full and effective participation and equal opportunities for leadership at all levels of decision-making in political, economic, and public life.

Contribution of Sport to SDG 5 Targets

63

Well-designed sport programs can offer a safe environment with multiple paths for the development of a range of skills and leadership experiences through involvement in various roles like coach, trainer, or sport manager. To achieve equitable leadership, organizational structures must ensure that women and girls fully participate in strategic planning, program design, resource allocation, and monitoring and evaluation (Commonwealth, 2015). Studies examining culture change and gender equity in sport point to the importance of women gaining access to, and influence within, power structures, especially through occupying leadership and decisionmaking positions (Burton, 2015) (Jeanes et al., 2020). More visible women as decision makers as well as displayed female leadership skills may motivate women and girls, thus increasing female participation at all levels in sport (UN, 2007). Close interaction with female role models can also be particularly important in engaging female participants in sport and in building their own leadership skills (Lindsey & Chapman, 2017). Female leadership and empowerment in sport have been promoted within and by specific initiatives in many contexts. Women who hold powerful positions in sport bodies may also publicly corroborate female leadership capabilities, thus tackling stereotypes (Meier, 2015). The result of Be’s (2014) findings showed that sport is a tool for developing girl leaders within the local Kenyan community when a close relationship between the target group and the local community exists. Localized female role models can have an especially strong impact, particularly if they have direct involvement or lines of communication with girls or young women (Meier, 2015). Target 5.2 Eliminate all forms of violence against all women and girls in the public and private spheres, including trafficking and sexual and other types of exploitation. Target 5.3 Eliminate all harmful practices, such as child, early and forced marriage, and female genital mutilation. Defining sexual violence purely in physical terms, ignores the institutional forms of violence in sport against women, such as the violence of discrimination that is involved in pay, resources, career provision safety, neglect, deprivation, insensitivity, and oppression that, many women face on a day-to-day, week-by-week (Jarvie & Thornton, 2006). Sport may contribute to these targets through intentionally planned and welldelivered initiatives. Specific programming and activities can build awareness and understanding of various violence forms, including sexual health, gender-based violence, and other harmful practices (Hershow et al., 2015). Using sport as a platform that provides a safe space, allows participants to feel comfortable and speak among peers. An important component of girls-only programming is the construction and maintenance of a safe space is particularly important for girls who are often taught to be quiet or passive in front of boys (Brady, 2005; Brady & Khan, 2002; UNFPA, 2003).

64

4

Sport for Gender Equality and Empowerment

Summary Sport is said to be a powerful, and potentially a radical and transformative tool in empowering girls and women and affecting gender norms and relations throughout a society. Girls are often placed at the center of development initiatives because empowering and/or protecting girls may have profound societal benefits. However, Girls’ and women’s involvement in sport is similarly framed and influenced by structured inequalities that may have both universal and context-specific dimensions (Saavedra, 2009). The Brighton Declaration launched the gender and sport movement into a new era and the gender equality in sport movement increasingly intersected with the international development sector. Key stakeholders, such as the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the International Olympic Committee (IOC), and the International Working Group (IWG) on Women and Sport together with other women and sport organizations have been working to promote gender equality within and beyond sport. More recently the 2030 agenda for sustainable development, addressed gender issues to build “a world in which every woman and girl enjoys full gender equality and all legal, social and economic barriers to their empowerment have been removed” (De Soysa & Zipp, 2019). In this regard, various actors seek to maximize the potential of sport as a tool to contribute to achieving SDG 5 targets. Providing safe spaces for women and girls, raising awareness on gender issues and challenging gender stereotypes and promoting female leaders and role models maybe maximize the contribution of sport to SDG 5. However, addressing gender equality and discrimination against women and girls within/beyond sport requires balanced policy approaches that ensure that gender equality is central to all policies, research, legislation, resource allocation, planning, implementation, and monitoring of initiatives and projects.

References Adriaanse, J., & Claringbould, I. (2016). Gender equality in sport leadership: From the Brighton declaration to the Sydney scoreboard. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 51(5), 547–566. https://doi.org/10.1177/1012690214548493 Batliwala, S. (2007). Taking the power out of empowerment—An experiential account. Development in Practice, 17(4–5), 557–565. https://doi.org/10.1080/09614520701469559 Be, M. (2014). The working elements of Moving the Goalposts: Football, peer education and leadership in Kenyan girls. Unpublished master’s thesis, Utrecht University. Beutler, I. (2008). Sport serving peace and development: Achieving the goals of the United Nations through sport. Sport in Society, 11(4), 359–369. Brady, M. (2005). Creating safe spaces and building social assets for young women in the developing world: A new role for sport. Women’s Studies Quarterly, 33(1/2), 35–49. Brady, M., & Khan, A. B. (2002). Letting girls play: Mathare youth sports association’s girls football programme. Population Council. Burton, L. (2015). Underrepresentation of women in sport leadership: A review of research. Sport Management Review, 18(2), 155–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2014.02.004

References

65

Commonwealth Secretariat. (2015). Sport for development and peace and the 2030 agenda for sustainable development analysis report. Commonwealth Secretariat. De Soysa, L., & Zipp, S. (2019). Gender equality, sport and the United Nation’s system. A historical overview of the slow pace of progress. Sport in Society, 22, 1783–1800. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 17430437.2019.1651018 Donnelly, P., & Donnelly, M. (2013). The London 2012 Olympic games: A gender equality audit. Centre for Sport Policy Studies Research Report. Centre for Sport Policy Studies, University of Toronto. Fraser, N. (2007). Feminist politics in the age of recognition: A two-dimensional approach to gender justice. Studies in Social Justice, 1(1), 23–35. Fraser, N. (2008, January 8). Emancipation is not an all or nothing affair. Eurozine, pp. 1–12. Hancock, M., Lyras, A., & Ha, J. P. (2013). Sport for development programmes for girls and women: A global assessment. Journal of Sport for Development, 1(1), 15–24. http://jsfd.org/ article/sport-for-development-programmes-for-girls-and-women-a-global-assessment/ Handy, F., & Kassa, M. (2004). Women’s empowerment in rural India. Paper presented at the ISTR conference. Hargreaves, J. (2000). Heroines of sport: The politics of difference and identity (1st ed.). Routledge. Hershow, R. B., Gannett, K., Merrill, J., Kaufman, E. B., Barkley, C., DeCelles, J., & Harrison, A. (2015). Using soccer to build confidence and increase HCT uptake among adolescent girls: A mixed-methods study of an HIV prevention programme in South Africa. Sport in Society, 18(8), 1009–1022. https://doi.org/10.1080/17430437.2014.997586 International Working Group on Women and Sport (IWG). (1994). Brighton declaration on women and sport. http://www.iwg-ti.org/iwg/brighton-declaration-on-women-an/ IWG. (1998). Women and sport: From Brighton to Windhoek, facing the challenge. UK Sports Council. IWG. (2002). From Windhoek to Montreal: Women and sport progress report 1998–2002. IWG. Jarvie, G., & Thornton, J. (2006). Sport, culture and society. Routledge. Jeanes, R., Hills, L., & Kay, T. (2016). Women, sport and gender inequity. In B. Houlihan & D. Malcolm (Eds.), Sport and society (3rd ed., pp. 134–156). Sage. Jeanes, R., Spaaij, R., Farquharson, K., McGrath, G., Magee, J., Lusher, D., & Gorman, S. (2020). Gender relations, gender equity, and community sports spaces. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 45, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193723520962955 Kabeer, N. (2001). Reflections on the measurement of women’s empowerment. In A. Sisask (Ed.), Discussing women’s empowerment: Theory and practice. SIDA studies (3) (pp. 17–57). Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency. isbn:9158689575. Kay, T., & Jeanes, R. (2010). Women, sport and gender inequity. In B. In Houlihan (Ed.), Sport and society: A student introduction (pp. 130–154). Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/ 9781446278833.n7 Lenskjy, H. J. (2012). Gender politics and the Olympic industry. Palgrave Macmillan. Lindsey, I., & Chapman, T. (2017). Enhancing the contribution of sport to the SDGs. Commonwealth Secretariat. Malhotra, A. (2003, February 4–5). Conceptualizing and measuring women’s empowerment as a variable in international development. Workshop on “Measuring Empowerment: CrossDisciplinary Perspectives”. World Bank. Martin, P. Y. (2003). “Said and done” versus “saying and doing” gendering practices, practicing gender at work. Gender and Society, 17(3), 342–366. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0891243203017003002 McDonald, M. G. (2019). SDP and feminist theory. In H. Collison, S. C. Darnell, R. Giulianotti, & D. Howe (Eds.), Routledge handbook of sport for development and peace (pp. 197–207). Routledge. Meier, M. (2005). Gender Equity, sport and development. Working Paper. Retrieved December 20, 2016, from http://assets.sportanddev.org/downloads/59_gender_equity_sport_and_ development.pdf Meier, M. (2015). The value of female sporting role models. Sport in Society, 18(8), 968–982. https://doi.org/10.1080/17430437.2014.997581

66

4

Sport for Gender Equality and Empowerment

Olympic.org. (2019a). First UN-IOC forum in Lausanne (2010). Olympic.org. Retrieved June 18, 2019, from https://www.olympic.org/news/first-un-ioc-forum-in-lausanne Olympic.org. (2019b). Cooperation with the UN. Retrieved June 25, 2019, from https://www. olympic.org/cooperation-with-the-un Olympic.org. (2019c). IOC gender equality review project. Retrieved June 18, 2019, from https:// stillmed.olympic.org/media/Document%20Library/OlympicOrg/News/2018/03/IOC-GenderEquality-Report-March-2018.pdf Oxaal, Z., & Baden, S. (1997). Gender and empowerment: Definitions, approaches and implications for policy. Institute of Development Studies, 40, 1–35. Pelak, C. F. (2006). Local- global process: Linking globalisation, democratisation and the development of women’s football in South Africa. Africa Spectrum, 41(3), 371–392. Petry, K., & Kroner, F. (2019). SDP and gender. In H. Collison, S. C. Darnell, R. Giulianotti, & D. Howe (Eds.), Routledge handbook of sport for development and peace (pp. 255–274). Routledge. Reeves, H., & Baden, S. (2000). Gender and development: Concepts and definitions. BRIDGE Development-Gender Report No. 55. Saavedra, M. (2005). Women, sport and development. Retrieved December 20, 2016, from http:// assets.sportanddev.org/downloads/56_women_sport_and_development.pdf Saavedra, M. (2009). Dilemmas and opportunities in gender and sport-in-development. In R. In Levermore & A. Beacom (Eds.), Sport and international development (pp. 124–155). Palgrave Macmillan. Sotiriadou, P., de Haan, D., & Knoppers, A. (2017). Understanding and redefining the role of men in achieving gender equality and equity in sport leadership/governance. Advanced research award programme 206/17. The Olympic Studies Centre. Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation. (2005). Gender and sport: Mainstreaming gender in sports projects. Available at: http://www.bridge.ids.ac.uk/sites/bridge.ids.ac.uk/ files/Docs/Sport_englisch.pdf Talbot, M. (1989). Being herself through sport. Paper presented to the leisure studies association conference ‘Leisure, Health and Wellbeing’. Tembon, L., & Fort, L. (2008). Girls education in the 21st century: Gender equality, empowerment, and economic growth. World Bank. Travers, A., & Fraser, S. (2008). The sport nexus and gender injustice. Studies in Social Justice, 2(1), 79–101. UN. (2007). Women, gender equality and sport: Women 2000 and beyond. United Nations, Division for Advancement of Women, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. UNESCO. (2019). Retrieved April 15, 2019, from http://www.unesco.org/new/en/social-andhumansciences themes/physical-education-and-sport/mineps/ UNFPA. (2003). State of world population 2003: Making 1 billion count: Investing in adolescents’ health and rights. UNFPA. UNFPA. (2017). Gender equality and equity: A summary review of UNESCO’s accomplishments since the Fourth World Conference on Women (Beijing 1995). Retrieved from http://unesdoc. unesco.org/images/0012/001211/121145e.pdf UNOSDP. (2019). Sport and the sustainable development goals—An overview outlining the contribution of sport to the SDGs. p. 17. Retrieved June 18, 2019, from https://www.un.org/ sport/sites/www.un.org.sport/files/ckfiles/files/Sport_for_SDGs_finalversion9.pdf Vescio, J., Wilde, K., & Crosswhite, J. J. (2005). Profiling sport role models to enhance initiatives for adolescent girls in physical education and sport. European Physical Education Review, 11(2), 153–170. World Bank. (2001). Engendering development: Through gender equality in rights, resources, and voice. World Bank policy research report. Oxford University Press. WSI. (2019). Retrieved June, 17, 2019, from http://www.sportsbiz.bz/womensportinternational/ conferences/brighton_declaration.htm Yancey, A. K., Siegel, J. M., & McDaniel, K. L. (2002). Role models, ethnic identity, and healthrisk behaviours in urban adolescents. Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, 156, 55– 61.

Chapter 5

Sport for Sustainable Economic Growth

Introduction The acceptance of the economics of sport as a sub-discipline of economics was partly signified in 1956, Rottenberg’s analysis of the baseball labor market (Sloane, 2006). Many of researches attracted to the economics of sport and the different models represented by American and European professional sport models. Research on the economic impact of sport has attempted to measure the direct and indirect effects of sport and major sporting events on economic variables such as employment, output or gross domestic product (GDP), and the impact of sport on urban and regional regeneration. However, measurement of the value of the sport industry has always had difficulties because of diverse range of economic activities that are directly and indirectly associated with sport. Since the 1980s, there have been improvements in the quality, consistency, and transparency of data used to produce the estimates of the economic value of sport (Davies, 2010). However, there are some outstanding issues relating to the reliability and validity of data in the models that remain unresolved. The United Kingdom studies throughout the 1990s were relatively successful in raising the profile of sport as an industrial sector within the academic environment, although their policy relevance remained limited due to the irregular and snapshot nature of the estimates produced (Davies, 2010). since 2000, macroeconomic impact studies have been commissioned on an increasingly regular basis, reflecting the strategic decision by sporting bodies such as Sport England and other Sports Councils in the United Kingdom to build an evidence base around the economic importance of sport. The European Commission identified the various economic contribution of sport: • Sport generates business activity directly, ranging from huge football enterprises to local sport clubs and gyms. • Sport requires human input and therefore is relatively good at generating employment locally, not only in the activity itself, but also in the construction and maintenance of facilities. In short, sport has a high employment multiplier. © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 K. Hozhabri et al., Sport for Sustainable Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06489-0_5

67

68

5

Sport for Sustainable Economic Growth

• Sport events and activities can have strong direct impacts on local economies, but also provide powerful occasions for marketing and promotion—from specific products to inward investment. • Sport and physical activity can improve mental agility as well as promote physical fitness and active and healthy aging. All of these can have direct effects on productivity and also reduce health-care costs. • Sport has lots of links with other economic activities and can be a significant element in a broader development strategy (European Commission, 2016). Now, in a modern economy, sport can be used as a vehicle for generating an even wider range of business and social actions and it has huge strengths as a means of motivating a wide range of individuals and groups (European Commission, 2016). Sport industry is regarded as a sun-rising industry, especially, in developed countries (He, 2018). It has played a critical part in development agendas, especially the 2030 agenda and SDG 8. The potential of sport to contribute to SDG 8 is connected to recognition by the World Economic Forum’s Global Agenda Council on the role of sports in society that it has become “one of the top ten industries globally (that) has truly achieved a global presence (and) is uniquely placed to provide long-lasting effects that support economic growth” (World Economic Forum, 2009). Moreover, progress toward other SDGs could also have a broader economic impact. For example, increases in sport-based participation associated with SDG 3 can reduce the direct and indirect costs of physical inactivity, which are projected to reach US$7.5 billion and US$26 billion in India and the United Kingdom, respectively, by 2030 (Lindsey & Chapman, 2017). There is an increasing understanding of the link between economic activity within the sport industry and a positive impact on sectors such as tourism, construction, health care, and education (Commonwealth, 2015). The relationship between sport and other areas of the economy suggests stimulation of the sport industry can have a broader, positive economic impact. Varied economic activities at different levels of sport have special characteristics that make them especially suited to contribute to SDG 8 and its targets. These activities include participant and spectator costs; facility construction; equipment and clothing manufacturing; media and sponsorship; events, travel, and tourism. Also, employment in all of these areas can be associated with SDG 8. The principal aim of this chapter is to provide a snapshot of the role of sport in the economy and the potential for sport to contribute to SDG 8 and its targets. Although these targets and overall SDGs are integrated and seen as a whole, we will try to address some keys point in targets and the potential of sport may contribute to them. Specifically, we address the two issues of employment, and tourism which are mentioned in SDG 8. Also, we follow with professional sport; more in terms of the connection it could have with the SDG 8 targets goal. Finally, we follow with the limitations of contribution of sport to SDG 8.

Sport Tourism and Events

69

Sport Tourism and Events The International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the World Tourism Organization (WTO) have recognized the value of sports tourism (Kurtzman, 2006: 52). The contribution of sport to local and regional tourism is an important part of the economical image of sport and can link to target 8.9: By 2030, devise and implement policies to promote sustainable tourism that creates jobs and promotes local culture and products. More recent studies see sport tourism as an area with the potential to contribute major economic benefits to host cities, regions, and countries. Sports tourism, as defined by the Council, was equal to approximately 32% of overall tourism industry receipts (Kurtzman, 2006). Sports tourism has been defined simply as “the use of sports for touristic endeavors” (Kurtzman, 2006). Sports tourists are considered to be those individuals, whose travel, (to outside the individual’s home region), is primarily “motivated by Sport”—to visit sports sites, to attend/participate in sports events, to observe sporting activity, to learn more about sports or improve skills, to experience the ambiance of a major event, the environment of a sporting activity, the meeting of sports persons, etc. (Kurtzman, 2006). Sports tourism includes six supply-side tourism categories as sports events, sports resorts, sports cruises, sports attractions, sports adventures, and sports tours. Sport tourism has been gaining more and more popularity, especially as tourists frequently participate in mega sport events (Malchrowicz-Mosko & Munsters, 2018). Sports events and activities can have a direct and powerful impact on local economies, also offering great marketing and promotion opportunities—from specific products to foreign investments. The economic impact of hosting sport events is particularly noteworthy. Major and smaller-scale events can have different impacts in respect of the quantity of incoming spectators and the extent to which these may crowd out other tourist visits and spending (Gibson et al., 2012; Taks, 2016). There is a large body of work analyzing the economic impact of hosting major sporting events (MSEs). The evidence for the economic benefits of major sport events is not unequivocal (Gratton et al., 2012), and pre-event predictions of economic impact have commonly been far greater than post-event analysis has found (Kasamati, 2008). The data collection in this area is complex and there are concerns about the reliability of estimates and data at sub-national and local levels (Davies, 2010). However, smaller events known as non-mega sporting events (NMSEs) also create durable benefits, including economic stimulus, for host communities and are more accessible to smaller-sized economies (Taks, 2013). Considering the investment level, these smaller events have a higher potential for positive economic impact, making hosting multiple smaller-sized events a better strategy than hosting a single major event (Commonwealth, 2015). Although much of the literature on events is concerned with analyzing the shortterm and immediate economic impacts, longer-term impacts that events can

70

5 Sport for Sustainable Economic Growth

potentially deliver also need to be given. These impacts cover a wide range of broader issues including sports participation and development, social impact, and legacies. Across all sport events, protecting the rights of the event’s labor force and host communities must be of paramount concern for organizers, government actors, and sporting organizations involved in hosting events. This can contribute to Target 8.8 (Protect labor rights and promote safe and secure working environments for all workers, including migrant workers, in particular, women migrants, and those in precarious employment). Consideration also needs to be given to the potential of sport events to improve the international image of cities and as a stimulus to develop tourism infrastructure (Gratton et al., 2012).

Sport and Employment Employment has two main objectives: economic objective and social objective. The economic objective is to organize and increase production and the social objectives of employment are to find jobs for all who want to work, to increase productivity, to ensure labor peace, and to harmonize labor supply and demand (Murat, 2007). The contribution of sport to employment is another potential economic benefit. The popularity of sport and its potential to be used as a “hook” for young people, means that well-designed sport-based interventions, linked to broader employability strategies, can contribute to target 8.6 (By 2020, substantially reduce the proportion of youth not in employment, education or training). Also, targets 8.3 and 8.5 on reducing unemployment among young people and persons with disabilities, are specific SDG targets where sport-based approaches may make a measured contribution (Dudfield, 2019). Lechner (2009) discusses three mechanisms for sports to affect employment. First, increased physical fitness levels could directly translate to increased productivity for those individuals. Second, sports provide social networking opportunities, especially for those with smaller social networks. Third, athletic participation may signal to employers that the individual is motivated and in good health, making them more appealing and competitive candidates in the job market (Lastuka & Cottingham, 2015). In many Commonwealth communities, sport-based programs have been positioned to support employment outcomes for young people and vulnerable groups. In these initiatives, sport is used as a means to engage young people who are not in education, employment, or training and provide a platform to develop transferable employment and entrepreneurship skills. The theories of change underpinning these programs are based on the appeal of sport to young people, the potential to use sport as a “hook,” and the ability to create a supportive environment around the sporting activity to assist in the development of relevant life, employment and entrepreneurship skills (Commonwealth, 2015). Data on trends in employment within sport are more limited than for overall sport-based economic activity. European Union figures show the contribution of

Professional Sport

71

sport-related employment to total employment is 2.12%, while sport-related share in Gross Value Added (GVA) is 1.76% (Commonwealth, 2015). However, some indicators point to a high proportion of part-time jobs within the sport industry (Camy, 2006). In the sports sector, it is easier for an individual who has a training certificate from any branch to find a part-time job than in other sectors (Mumcu et al., 2019). There is evidence that volunteering helps improve employability and is a route to employment. The culture of volunteering in sports brings many benefits. The Australian Sports Commission (2010) acknowledges that volunteering in sports has significant economic value and accessible paths to paid employment for individuals. In 2014, 1.8 million volunteers donated 158 million hours to the sports industry, performing activities such as administrative work, coaching, and assisting with food service. Boston Consulting Group (BCG) estimated that this would be equivalent to about 90,000 full-time jobs and an additional $3 billion in economic value (Parsons, 2018). There is consensus among social scientists working in this area that there are three channels through which volunteering may affect earnings: The first is the acquisition of skills and work-related experience (is suggested by human capital theory, according to which disparities in earnings are believed to be caused by differences in cognitive ability (e.g., educational qualifications) and job skills (e.g., work experience); the second is the extension of social networks (is suggested by social capital theory according to which well-paying jobs are partially due to having useful social connections.); and the third is ability signaling (It is widely believed that volunteer activities signal abilities) (Wilson et al., 2019). From a sports economics perspective, volunteers have attracted research interest because they are different from employees in professional sport organization. The economic value of sportbased volunteering is significant and, for individuals, volunteering in sport can provide accessible routes into paid employment (Lindsey & Chapman, 2017). Community-based participation and volunteering in sport may enable the engagement of otherwise marginalized groups and allow the development of shared identities and social ties (Sen, 2011).

Professional Sport Professional Sports have become large commercial enterprises. Over the past century, professional sports, have become a major cultural factor within societies. From the economic activity point of view, professional sport offers consumers and entertainment services, and the spectators obtain psychological satisfaction from the consumption of these services and, therefore, they are ready to pay for them. At the same time, the higher the quality of the services provided (which is expressed in the prestige of the competition), the higher the price (Barbu & Popescu, 2020). Within the vast literature on professional sports in North America, work on the economic benefits of major and minor league sports to communities and the relative

72

5 Sport for Sustainable Economic Growth

merits of public development and subsidization of sports stadiums. Quackenbush (2020) ackonwledges that more than two-thirds of adults in the United States, considered themselves fans of at least one sport leagues. This fandom has led to a major amount of economic capital produced by sporting leagues and franchises (Quackenbush, 2020). North American sports market is the largest in the world, with revenues of over US$50 billion from major sports leagues—NFL, MLB, NBA, and NHL. The NFL, for example, generates nearly $9 billion in revenue each year, while the NBA around $3.7 billion. In comparison, the European football market is estimated at 28.4 billion euros in the season 2017–2018, according to a Deloitte report. However, several studies showed that professional sports create little to no definitive economic benefits for the cities they are present in (Harger et al. 2016; Humphreys & Nowak, 2017; Jasina & Rotthoff, 2016). Here, we are not going to focus just on the economic aspect of professional sport, as it is an industry with political and social aspects that may address various SDGs like gender equality and social cohesion. Cepeda (2021) implies to different types of gender discrimination in professional sports: Make women invisible in sport competitions, strengthening the idea of male superiority, normalization, and perpetuation of gender inequality through the promotion of masculine exemplars and underrepresentation of women’s sports in the mass media. Despite all the ways in which sports builds, reinforces, and perpetuates gender inequality, it can also have a transformative role under certain circumstances, it can contribute to social equality, to reduce inequalities, to oppose prejudices and stereotypes, and to become a model for eradicating discriminatory behavior (Cepeda, 2021). Considering the social cohesion, professional sports can work as a double-edged sword: Fans of rival professional sports teams who otherwise have much in common display a seemingly irrational enmity simply because of group affiliations marked largely by different colored jerseys. And, inversely, people who may not otherwise have much in common can sometimes bond through their participation in a team with shared goals that require a collective effort. The rights of young people seeking careers in professional sport also need to be protected. A more general risk is that the pursuit of professional sport careers may divert young people from alternative education and employment routes (Lindsey & Chapman, 2017).

The Limitations and Challenges Despite the high potential in sport to contribute to SDG 8; there are still limitations and challenges. The first is concern that there is not enough data available on the sports economy and employment at the national or regional levels to make strategic decisions. Part of this is due to the complexity of data collection because of a diverse range of economic activities that are directly and indirectly associated with sport. Also, scant research at the national, local, and subregional levels; has provoked this complexity. The few researches have been carried out at this scale; tend to be one-off

Summary

73

snapshot studies undertaken to identify the size of the sports industry at a specific point in time and as such provide only limited baseline information. Second, efforts to generate economic benefits through sport, need broader investment in infrastructure and partnerships between sport-oriented organizations and those from other development sectors—a diverse array of public, private, and civil society organizations—working at levels from the international to local. Third, development of sport tourism and events raises some environmental concerns. Reducing the impact of sporting events and infrastructure on the natural environment, optimize environmental performance of sport venues, minimizing the games’ carbon emissions, and campaigning to use sport to catalyze positive environmental change (e.g., by increasing knowledge and promoting behavior change among fans) may enhance alignment with the principles of sustainable development. In sum, the importance of environmental sustainability within global sport is now recognized and discussed more than ever before, and it is even reasonable to suggest that there is an emerging environmental consciousness within sport. Finally, SDG targets 8.7 and 8.8 focus on the need to protect child and labor rights, and to promote safe and secure working environments for all workers. Sport is not immune in this area since exploitation is increasingly recognized in some parts of the sport industry, especially in areas that have been transformed by globalization (Lindsey & Chapman, 2017). Evidence, therefore, shows that children run the risk of being exploited not only in the sport they might be involved but also by working in the divisions of the sports industry that remain largely unregulated. Professional sport careers need to be protected from exploitation as it is achievable for only a few young people, but are highly attractive to many. Too strong a focus on professional sport can be counterproductive, diverting young people away from education and employment opportunities (Commonwealth, 2015). All stakeholders must ensure that the protection of human rights is fundamental to efforts to grow the sports industry and promote inclusive and sustainable economic growth and productive employment.

Summary While SDG 1 is focused on reducing the poverty and promoting equal access to economic resources; SDG 8 focused on creating conditions for sustainable economic growth and productive employment. Sport is an important economic enterprise that can bring benefits to other areas of society, based on competent management (Barbu & Popescu, 2020). The economic role of sport is pronounced in several direct and indirect ways. First of all, sports health improvement practices contribute to minimizing economic losses in almost all areas, which, have a powerfully destructive effect on the economic system (Turcu, 2009). Sport has a direct contribution to economy by job creation, synergies with the tourism sectors, and support the modernization of infrastructure as well as leading to the emergence of new

74

5

Sport for Sustainable Economic Growth

partnerships for financing sport and leisure facilities. Also, sport is the main component of high-quality workforce training, contribute to reduction of unemployment youth. However, the contribution of sport to sustainable economic growth, faces challenges. These include the complexities of measuring the economic value of sport, the environmental problems of sport events, and the rights of young people seeking careers in professional sport also need to be protected. Promotion of safe and secure working environments to protect child and labor workers’ rights, especially in professional sport, also may contribute to the 8.7 and 8.8 targets.

References Australian Sports Commission. (2010). The economic contribution of sport to Australia. Retrieved from http://www.ausport.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/341072/Frontier_Research_The_ Economic_Contribution_of_Sport_summary_report.pdf Barbu, M., & Popescu, M. C. (2020). The contribution of sport to economic and social development. Studia UBB Educatio Artis Gymn, LXV(1), 27–38. https://doi.org/10.24193/subbeag.65 (1).03 Camy, J. (2006). Employment opportunities in the sports sector: A review of the European situation. In G. di Cola (Ed.), Beyond the scoreboard: Youth employment opportunities and skills development in the sports sector. Retrieved from http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/ public/%2D%2D-ed_emp/documents/publication/wcms_116484.pdf Cepeda, I. (2021). Wage inequality of women in professional tennis of the leading international tournaments: Gender equality vs market discrimination? Journal of International Women’s Studies, 22(5), 407–426. Commonwealth Analysis. (2015). Sport for development and peace and the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. Commonwealth Secretariat. Davies, L. E. (2010). Sport and economic regeneration: A winning combination? Sport in Society: Cultures, Commerce, Media, Politics, 13(10), 1438–1457. https://doi.org/10.1080/17430437. 2010.520935 Dudfield, O. (2019). SDP and the sustainable development goals. In H. Collison, S. C. Darnell, R. Giulianotti, & D. Howe (Eds.), Routledge handbook of sport for development and peace (pp. 116–127). Routledge. European Commission. (2016). Study on the contribution of sport to regional development through the structural funds. Publications Office of the European Union. Gibson, H. J., Kaplanidou, K., & Kang, S. J. (2012). Small-scale event sport tourism: A case study in sustainable tourism. Sport Management Review, 15, 160–170. Gratton, C., Ramchandani, G., Wilson, D., & Liu, D. (2012). The global economics of sport. Routledge. Harger, K., Humphreys, B., & Ross, A. (2016). Do new sports facilities attract new businesses? Journal of Sports Economics, 17(5), 483–500. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527002516641168 He, Y. (2018). A study on the impact of sport industry on economic growth: An investigation from China. The Journal of Sport and Applied Science, 2(2), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.13106/jsas. 2018.Vol2.no2.1 Humphreys, B. R., & Nowak, A. (2017). Professional sports facilities teams and property values: Evidence from NBA team departures. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 66, 39–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2017.06.001 Jasina, J., & Rotthoff, K. (2016). The impact of the NHL lockout on country employment. International Journal of Sport Finance, 11(2), 114.

References

75

Kasamati, E. (2008). Economic aspects and the summer Olympics: A review of related research. In M. Weed (Ed.), Sport and tourism: A reader (pp. 314–327). Routledge. Kurtzman, J. (2006). Economic impact: Sport tourism and the city. Journal of Sport & Tourism, 10(1), 47–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/14775080500101551 Lastuka, A., & Cottingham, M. (2015). The effect of adaptive sports on employment Amon people with disabilities. Disability and Rehabilitation, 38, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288. 2015.1059497 Lechner, M. (2009). Long-run labor market and health effects of individual sports activities. Journal of Health Economics, 28, 839–854. Lindsey, I., & Chapman, T. (2017). Enhancing the contribution of sport to the sustainable development goals. Commonwealth Secretariat. Malchrowicz-Mosko, E., & Munsters, W. (2018). Sport tourism: A growth market considered from a cultural perspective. Journal of Martial Arts Anthropology, 18(4), 25–38. https://doi.org/10. 14589/ido.18.4.4 Mumcu, H. E., Karakullukcu, O. F., & Karakus, M. (2019). Youth employment in the sports sector. International Journal of Society Researches, 11(18), 2651–2663. https://doi.org/10.26466/ opus.535301 Murat, S. (2007). Dünden bugüne İstanbul’un işgücü ve istihdam yapısı. İTO Yayınları, Yayın No:73. Parsons, S. (2018). More than a game: Evaluating the economic contribution of sport to the Australian economy. Treasury Research Institute Essay Competition. Quackenbush, R. (2020). The economic impact of professional sports in the United States. Kinesiology, Sport Studies, and Physical Education Synthesis Projects. 110. https:// digitalcommons.brockport.edu/pes_synthesis/110 Sen, A. (Ed.). (2011). Peace and democratic society. Open book publishers/Commonwealth Secretariat. Sloane, P. J. (2006). Rottenberg and the economics of sport after 50 years: An evaluation. University of Wales Swansea and IZA Bonn, No. 2175. Taks, M. (2013). Social sustainability of non-mega sport events in a global world. European Journal for Sport and Society, 10(2), 121–141. Taks, M. (2016). The rise and fall of mega sport events: The future is non-mega sport events. In Y. V. Auweele, E. Cook, & J. Parry (Eds.), Ethics and governance in sport: The future of sport imagined (pp. 84–93). Routledge. Turcu, I. (2009). Performance management in physical education and sports institutions. Bulletin of the Transilvania University of Brasov, 2(51), 163–168. Wilson, J., Mantovan, N., & Sauer, R. (2019). The economic benefits of volunteering and social class. Social Science Research, 85, 102368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2019.102368 World Economic Forum. (2009). The global agenda 2009. Retrieved from www.weforum.org/pdf/ globalagenda.pdf

Chapter 6

Sport for Sustainable Environment

Introduction Since the conference on the human environment in Stockholm in 1972; scientific research and political activity have greatly increased transnational awareness of unsustainable development, pollution, global warming, risks associated with climate change, and the destruction of ecosystems. There are several reasons why the environment has assumed such an importance within the policies of international development. First is that the problem of environmental degradation—and climate change in particular—has worsened, not improved since the middle of the twentieth century. A whole range of evidence exists to support this claim, much of which is summarized in the 2014 Summary Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2014). The report shows that mean global temperatures are now 1.0  C higher than during the nineteenth century, the likely impacts of which are dire and far-ranging (Darnell, 2019). McArthur and Rasmussen (2018) argue that the least advancement over the course of the MDGs was made in terms of environmental sustainability (Swatuk, 2020). Second is that the environment is linked in some way to all of the issues that are normatively and regularly recognized in the theory, practice, and research of international development (and by extension those attended to in the SDP sector). These include issues such as health promotion, education, and gender empowerment. Third, environmental problems impress all the countries and contents and it will not solve by consensus of number of states. Unsustainable environmental policies in one country, influence, on neighbors. Conferences on the Human Environment also, sought to bring together developed and developing countries to establish a global consensus on environmental issues. The inclusion of sport within the SDGs and the 2030 development agenda marks the highest-profile and most specific recognition to date of sport’s potential contribution to sustainable development. This, in turn, highlights the increasing importance and significance of the environment in the burgeoning relationship between sport and international development (Darnell, 2019). The relationship between sport © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 K. Hozhabri et al., Sport for Sustainable Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06489-0_6

77

78

6 Sport for Sustainable Environment

and environment may explain by two broad goals: first to reduce the ecological footprint of sports activities (hosting of sport events has been linked to ecological damage such as a decline in air and water quality, a decrease in habitats and a reduction of species (Mansfield, 2009). However, this is a mutual relation, for example, air pollution and lack of adequate green space reduce physical activity and sports. Smit et al. (2011) acknowledged that there is strong and increasing evidence of the impact of the physical urban environment, and the provision of green space, on various aspects of health and well-being, and on patterns of health inequalities. Second; to explain the popularity of sports to raise environmental awareness in general (Casper & Pfahl, 2015). Sport provides a visible platform from which to speak and educate about environmental issues. Environmental protection has been emphasized within SDP sector, but it is still somewhat rare for SDP organizations to focus primarily on the environment. This chapter explores the potential of sport to contribute to environmental issues. As several SDGs have implications for environment issues, we are not going to analyze their targets. Instead, we advance environmental trends within international community and IOC. In another part, we address two different approaches that sport can or might play in supporting and achieving a sustainable environment. By studying this process, the reader will get acquainted with the strengths and weaknesses of the relationship between sports and the environment and will come up with ideas in this area.

The Environmental Concerns and International Community The environment has been tied to matters of international development for decades, and has long been a focus of scholars within development studies (Millington & Darnell, 2020). In 1972, the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment was held in Stockholm, Sweden. It led to the Stockholm Declaration, a statement composed of 26 principles and 109 recommendations concerning the relationship between the environment and development, including the need to safeguard the world’s natural resources, produce renewable forms of energy, and prevent pollution while stressing the importance of environmental education to support developing countries in their pursuit of environmental management and sustainability (United Nations, 1972). It also led to the creation of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), an agency within the UN system that advocates for environmentally sustainable human development. Since this period, scientific research and “green” political activity has greatly increased transnational awareness of (un)sustainable development, pollution, and global warming, and of the environmental damage and risks associated with climate change, such as extreme weather, rising sea levels, water shortages, the loss of biodiversity, and the destruction of ecosystems (Giulianotti et al., 2018). In 1987, the UN convened the Brundtland Commission to rally countries in the collective pursuit of environmentalism in development. The Brundtland

The Environmental Concerns and International Community

79

Commission popularized the term “sustainable development,” defining it as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (WCED, 1987). The 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, held in Rio de Janeiro (and sometimes referred to as the Rio Summit or the Earth Summit), continued to draw attention to the seriousness of environmental issues facing humanity, and helped to solidify the importance of the environment and sustainability within development policies and practices. It subsequently led to the formalization of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, which in turn begat the 1997 Kyoto Protocol that set targets on greenhouse gas emissions and the 2015 Paris Agreement on Climate Change. The recent attention paid to environmental issues through frameworks of the 2030 agenda for sustainable development and has been foregrounded within SDG 7 (to sustainable energy), SDG 9 (sustainable industrialization), SDG 11 (resilient and sustainable cities), SDG 12 (sustainable consumption), SDG 13 (action to combat climate change), SDG 14 (conservation of the world’s oceans), and SDG 15 (protection of the forests and biosphere) (Millington & Darnell, 2020). Also, Osborn et al. (2015) identify SDGs 7, 12, and 13 as the three most important goals on which the developed world needs to place a strong emphasis for action so as to relieve the overall anthropogenic pressures on the planet and its natural systems (Osborn et al., 2015). In 2015, the United Nations (UN) announced the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The environment is a major strand running through the SDGs, to a much greater extent than in the earlier MDGs. The SDGs foregrounded environmental sustainability as a primary issue of international development, and made clear the need for environmental protection and remediation. Giulianotti et al. (2018) acknowledged that 12 of these goals have implications for the physical environment. The most obvious cases relate to SDGs 6 (securing water and sanitation), 7 (sustainable energy), 13 (combatting climate change), 14 (conserving natural water environments and resources), and 15 (protecting ecosystems). Many other SDGs connect directly to the physical environment as well. SDGs 1 and 2 relate to agriculture and food security, which are threatened by climate change and environmental degradation; SDG 3, ensuring health and well-being, is directly threatened by pollution; SDGs 9, 11, and 12 relate to sustainable industrialization, housing, production, and consumption, respectively, which depend heavily on environmental protection; and, given the environment’s role within the other goals, SDG 17 would mandate the participation of environmental organizations in global partnerships working toward sustainable development (Giulianotti et al., 2018). These were major milestones in the struggle to create and maintain a global framework for environmental sustainability (Darnell, 2019).

80

6

Sport for Sustainable Environment

Sport and Environmental Approaches Although global environmental issues in different forms have common characteristics, each area needs specific examination in its own right. In sport, green awareness and policies and practices related to the environment have grown, much of which was due to the United Nations’ role in various fields. The United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) used the popularity of sport in the 1990s to “promote environmental awareness and respect for the environment among the public, especially young people” and established environmental guidelines for sporting events such as the Olympic games (Jarvie & Thornton, 2006). In 1994, the sports and environment unit created by UNEP which evaluated and continuously reported the effects of hosting the International Olympic games on the environment. UNEP teamed with the International Olympic Committee (IOC) in 1994 with a view to: • Promoting the integration of environmental considerations in sports. • Using the popularity of sports to promote environmental awareness and respect for the environment among the public, especially young people. • Promoting the development of environmentally friendly sports facilities and the manufacture of environmentally friendly sporting goods (Jarvie & Thornton, 2006). The objectives of this common assessment include two dominant approaches: first, observation of the environmental impacts of sport (Mansfield, 2009) and the second approach, using popularity of sport to solve environmental problems (when the environment is under pressure; by climate change and population growth (Carmichael, 2020), sport encompasses all aspects of the environmental debate. These two approaches are not separate from each other and in some cases, such as the Olympic games, in addition, to comply with environmental requirements, have become a platform for encouraging the community to support the environment. In the following, we will deal with these two approaches briefly, although in some cases they are intertwined and overlap. Since 2008, there has been a growing academic interest in sport and the environment, encompassing the legacies of major sporting events such as the Olympic games to the footprint of smaller individual sports (such as golf), team-based facilities, and the behavior of those concerned (Karamichas, 2013; Mansfield & Wheaton, 2011; Millington & Wilson, 2016). The hosting of major sporting events creates numerous challenges and has forced major sporting organizations to think about the potential environmental impact and management of hosting such events (Jarvie & Thornton, 2006). Critiques have focused on increases in waste production, pollution, energy consumption, and the reconfiguration of landscapes (e.g., the construction of stadiums). The IOC has taken steps in this regard, which are mentioned in the next section. This Criticism is not limited to major events. All sports and outdoor recreational activities involve the use of natural resources (e.g., energy and water), and to some extent will have an impact on the environment. The organization, provision, and participation in sport and outdoor recreation activities

IOC and Sustainable Environment

81

can generate a range of environmental impacts. These impacts can vary in terms of their nature, timescale, and geographical scale. Some of these environmental impacts will be explicit, for example, land use for facilities and venues, or emissions created by travelling. Other impacts will be more hidden, for example, carbon emissions generated in the production of sport and outdoor apparel or keeping indoor ice rinks and hockey arenas cool. While it is impractical to completely eliminate the environmental impact while participating, spectating, or consuming sport and outdoor recreation, it is practical to promote more sustainable behaviors. As organizations increase their commitment and sophistication of their sustainable initiatives, they are creating campaigns to outwardly promote sustainable behaviors (McCullough et al., 2016). In the second approach, sport establishes its role in SDP with the UN positing that sport could raise “awareness towards climate protection and . . . stimulate enhanced community response for local environmental preservation” and might even “make significant contributions to combat climate change” (United Nations, 2016). The UN has been at the forefront of any move toward an environmental turn within SDP since the early 2000s. Sport is now specifically included in the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) agenda (Millington et al., 2018). The inclusion of sport within the SDGs and the 2030 development agenda marks the highest profile and most specific recognition to date of sport’s potential contribution to sustainable development. This, in turn, highlights the increasing importance and significance of the environment in the burgeoning relationship between sport and international development (UNOSDP, 2016). One of the challenges across the SDGs is the tensions and competing interests across them. For instance, several SDGs emphasize urbanization (SDG 11) and economic development (SDG 8) while at least 12 of these goals have profound consequences for the environment: SDGs 6, concerned with securing water and sanitation; 7, sustainable energy; 13, combatting climate change; 14, conserving natural water environments and resources; and 15, protecting ecosystems. Reconciling these tensions will be very challenging across the global political and economic system, let alone for resource-stretched NGOs in the SDP sector (Giulianotti et al., 2018). However, these SDGs are seen as a whole and integrated goals, and require to balance in a right approach.

IOC and Sustainable Environment Concerns about environmental issues were raised about the hosting of the Olympic Games as far back as the 1964 games in Tokyo. The 1970s were marked by criticism of the IOC for the detrimental effects of hosting the Olympic Games on environment and showed that sport organizations like the IOC could no longer ignore the environmental aspects of sport, or the damage caused by sports events (Cantelon & Letters, 2000; Harvey et al., 2014). The negative environmental impacts of the 1992 Winter Olympics in Albertville drew renewed attention to the importance of

82

6 Sport for Sustainable Environment

minimizing sport’s environmental footprint. The criticisms turned into a landmark in the IOC’s position on environmental issues. By the 1990s, the IOC began to concertedly fold ecological concerns and promote its leadership in the environmental sector, with a particular focus on the sustainability legacy. During this decade environment was established as the “third pillar” of Olympism alongside sport and culture (Giulianotti et al., 2018). The Sydney Summer Olympics of 2000 was a primetime testing ground for the IOC’s proclaimed environmental concerns (Boykoff, 2017). Mass media generally proclaimed the games to be a smashing green success. From the earliest days, commitment to the highest standards of environmental achievement was a hallmark of Sydney’s games. The success of Sydney underscores the changing attitude toward environmental concerns. The 2000 Sydney Games also came with plans for a longterm legacy that include the ecological modernization (EM) of the host nation. In 2001, Olympic hosts started dedicating whole parts of their applications to the Olympic Games Impact (OGI) studies. These studies “were designed to evaluate the Games” legacy for the host nation and city against a raft of social, economic, cultural, and environmental indicators, hence providing an “evidence base” for measuring the positive societal consequences of the Games for its hosts (MacRury & Poynter, 2009). The Athens 2004 Olympics failed to match the environmental successes of Sydney 2000. The reality of Athens proves that the 2004 Olympics host city has not learned anything from the Sydney experience and collaboration with NGOs has been particularly problematic. At the 2008 Beijing Summer Olympics, organizers launched their campaign with a green slogan: “Green Olympics, High-tech Olympics, the People’s Olympics” (Boykoff, 2017). The organizers made reforms in line with environmental concerns: construction of brand-new public transportation lines, improve vehicle emission standards, introduce water conservation methods, close down factories, make power plants use alternative fuels, and forbid heavily polluting vehicles from entering Beijing. However, these measures were repealed after the Games, with some pollutant levels returning to their previous levels. The London 2012 Olympic Games environmental action plan revolved around a number of environmental values such as low carbon production, zero waste, conserving biodiversity, and promoting environmental awareness and partnerships (Jarvie & Thornton, 2006). The London Olympics plan included five key themes: climate change, waste, biodiversity, inclusion, and healthy living (London 2012, 2007). London’s ambition toward sustainability was not restricted to local and national concerns but moved a step beyond the global arena. This moved hosting the Games beyond the successful execution of a one-off event into something with a long-term impact. London was the first Summer Games host city mandated to carry out the OGI study (ESRC, 2010). The green message of the Rio 2016 games was: “The 2016 Games will accelerate several important environmental projects bringing direct benefits to local communities including regeneration of urban areas, air quality improvement and reduced consumption of non-renewable natural resources” (Boykoff, 2017). Despite the IOC Evaluation Commission’s enthusiasm, implementing Rio’s sustainability plans

IOC and Sustainable Environment

83

proved problematic. In March 2015, the Brazilian press was reporting that none of the major environmental projects related to the Olympics would be completed before the Games commenced (Boykoff, 2017). While there were some modest positive strides made in the environmental field, especially in regard to public transport upgrades, a significant gap emerged between bid rhetoric and empirical reality. In September 2015, IOC President Thomas Bach spoke at the UN Sustainable Development Summit in New York, where in addition to his standard rhetoric about the IOC’s goal “to make the world a better place through sport,” he offered fullthroated support for the UN’s 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. He stated, “Olympic Agenda 2020 addresses progress with regards to sustainability, credibility, and youth in the context of the Olympic Movement (Boykoff, 2017). Therefore, with this Olympic Agenda 2020 the IOC is absolutely in line with the objectives of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.” While the IOC has long sought to align the Games with notions of “environmentalism,” including by naming the environment as the third pillar of Olympism, Agenda 2020 appears to be making a much stronger claim toward meeting positive outcomes on sustainability in all of its holistic aspects: economic, social, and environmental (IOC, 2014: Recommendation 4). The IOC recognizes three spheres of influence and impact (IOC as leader of the Olympic Movement, owner of the Olympic Games, and as an organization itself). The five focus areas of the IOC sustainability strategy are infrastructure, sourcing and resource management, mobility, workforce, and climate (IOC, 2017), which are aligned with 11 of the 17 SDGs. They have also been selected by considering today’s key sustainability challenges and the manner in which the IOC and its stakeholders believe the IOC can most effectively contribute. Furthermore, according to Thomas Bach, Agenda 2020 appears to be very well aligned with the objectives of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development of the United Nations (United Nations, 2015; Boykoff, 2017). However, Karamichas (2013) has argued that there is little evidence to suggest that hosting sports mega-events can contribute to environmental sustainability in any meaningful way, and that the games in fact compound environmental degradation, even though notions of environmental “remediation” or “development” have specifically informed bids to host sport mega-events in Mexico, South Africa, China, and Brazil (Millington & Darnell, 2020). The 2020 Olympic/Paralympic Games have been postponed to 2021, due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Tokyo is expecting to receive approximately 20 million visitors (non-residents), to be attended by 70,000 volunteers for the games and 8000 for the city. At the games, there will be the participation of 11,090 Olympic athletes and 4400 Paralympic athletes (Gallego et al., 2020). According to the latest decisions of the organizers of the Tokyo Olympics, the competitions will be held in Tokyo and several other cities without spectators. Will this period of the Olympic Games without the presence of spectators have the least negative effects on the environment?

84

6

Sport for Sustainable Environment

Summary The environment has been tied to matters of international development for decades, and has long been a focus of scholars within development studies. There is also evidence that Sport might offer a means of attracting people to learn about the environment through outdoor education and through the building of partnerships with environmental organizations (Millington et al., 2018). While sport in general, and sports mega-events, in particular, have been posited as able to provide a platform for discussing environmental issues, it is still more likely that sports events cause more environmental damage. This continues despite the IOC and the Olympic Movement’s efforts to take the environment and sustainability into account throughout the lifecycle of an Olympic Games project and frame the events as environmentally friendly. The inclusion of sport within the SDGs of the 2030 agenda makes a specific recognition to date of sport’s potential contribution to sustainable development and in turn, a sustainable environment. Several SDGs have implications for environment that may much support for sport’s potential to contribute to environmental issues. This is a new challenge for governance and planning: sport has to be integrated into a broader sustainable development strategy.

References Boykoff, J. (2017). Green games: The Olympics, sustainability, and Rio 2016. In A. Zimbalist (Ed.), Rio 2016 (pp. 179–205). Brookings Institution Press. Cantelon, H., & Letters, M. (2000). The making of the IOC environmental policy as the third dimension of the Olympic movement. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 35, 294–308. Carmichael, A. (2020). Time for practice; Sport and the environment. Managing Sport and Leisure. https://doi.org/10.1080/23750472.2020.1757493 Casper, J. M., & Pfahl, M. E. (2015). Sport management and the natural environment. Routledge. Darnell, S. (2019). SDP and the environment. In H. Collison, S. C. Darnell, R. Giulianotti, & D. Howe (Eds.), Routledge handbook of sport for development and peace (pp. 396–405). Routledge. ESRC. (2010). Olympic games impact study—London 2012 pre-games report. Retrieved July 12, 2019, from https://esrc.ukri.org/files/news-events-and-ublications/news/2014/olympicgames-impactstudy-london-2012-pre-games-report/ Gallego, V., Nishiura, H., Sah, R., & Rodrigues-Morales, A. (2020). The COVID-19 outbreak and implications for the Tokyo 2020 Summer Olympic Games. Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease, 34, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmaid.2020.101604 Giulianotti, R., Darnell, S. C., Collison, H., & Howe, D. (2018). Sport for development and peace and the environment: The case for policy, practice, and research. Sustainability, 10, 2241. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072241 Harvey, J., Horne, J., Safai, P., Darnell, S., & Courchesne-O’Neill, S. (2014). Sport and social movements: From the local to the global. Bloomsbury Academic. IOC. (2014). Olympic Agenda 2020: 20 + 20 Recommendations, 127th IOC Session, December 2014. Available at: https://stillmed.olympics.com/media/Document%20Library/OlympicOrg/

References

85

Documents/Olympic-Agenda-2020/Olympic-Agenda-2020-127th-IOC-Session-Presentation. pdf?_ga=2.23525498.1114643904.1657013614-359926303.1656845959 International Olympic Committee (IOC). (2017). IOC Sustainability Strategy (October). Available at: http://extrassets.olympic.org/sustainability-strategy/_content/download.pdf IPCC. (2014). Summary report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Retrieved from http://ar5-syr.ipcc.ch/topic_summary.php Jarvie, G., & Thornton, J. (2006). Sport, culture and society. Routledge. Karamichas, J. (2013). The Olympic games and the environment. Palgrave Macmillan. London 2012. (2007). Sustainability. http://www.london2012.com/about-us/ MacRury, I., & Poynter, G. (2009). Olympic cities and social change. In G. Poynter & I. MacRury (Eds.), Olympic cities: 2012 and the remaking of London (pp. 303–326). Ashgate. Mansfield, L. (2009). Fitness cultures and environmental (In)justice? International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 44(4), 345–362. https://doi.org/10.1177/1012690209343029 Mansfield, L., & Wheaton, B. (2011). Leisure and the politics of the environment. Leisure Studies, 30(4), 383–386. https://doi.org/10.1080/02614367.2011.626916 McArthur, J., & Rasmussen, K. (2018). Change of peace: Accelerations and advances during the Millennium Development Goal era. World Development, 105, 132–143. McCullough, B. P., Pfahl, M. E., & Nguyen, S. (2016). The green waves of environmental sustainability in sport. Sport in Society, 19(7), 1040–1065. https://doi.org/10.1080/17430437. 2015.10962511 Millington, R., & Darnell, S. C. (2020). Sport, development and environmental sustainability— Issues and controversies. In R. Millington & S. C. Darnell (Eds.), Sport, development and environmental sustainability (pp. 1–18). Routledge. Millington, B., & Wilson, B. (2016). The greening of golf: Sport, globalization and the environment. Manchester University Press. Millington, R., Darnell, S. C., & Millington, B. (2018). Ecological modernization and the Olympics: The case of golf and Rio’s “green” Games. Sociology of Sport Journal, 35(1), 8–16. https://doi.org/10.1123/ssj.2016-0131 Osborn, D., Cutter, A., & Ullah, F. (2015). Universal sustainable development goals: Understanding the transformational challenge for developed countries. Stakeholder Forum. Smit, W., Hancock, T., Kumaresen, J., Santos-Burgoa, C., Sánchez-Kobashi Meneses, R., & Friel, S. (2011). Toward a research and action agenda on urban planning/design and health equity in cities in low and middle income countries. Journal of Urban Health, 88, 875–885. Swatuk, L. A. (2020). Add sport and stir? The SDGs and sport-environment development. In R. Millington & S. C. Darnell (Eds.), Sport, development and environmental sustainability (pp. 19–34). Routledge. United Nations. (1972). Declaration of the United Nations conference on the human environment. UN General Assembly. United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. United Nations. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/21252030%20 Agenda%20for%20Sustainable%20Development%20web.pdf United Nations. (2016). Sport and the sustainable development goals: An overview outlining the contribution of sport to the SDGs. UN Office on Sport for Development and Peace. UNOSDP. (2016). Sport and sustainable development goals. Retrieved from www.un.org/sport/ content/why-sport/sport-and-sustainable-development-goals WCED. (1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our common future. United Nations.

Chapter 7

Sport for Peace and Integration

Introduction The idea of using sports to advance peace endeavors, is nevertheless, not a new concept. The first documented use of sports to conciliate in times of conflict dates back to the ninth century BC in ancient Greece with an Olympian Truce (Ekecheiria) intended to stop war between the Peloponnesian city-states during the celebration of the Olympic games (Cardenas, 2012). In recent years, there has been considerable interest at political and public levels in the contribution that sport might make to advancing peace and conflict resolution in divided and conflict-damaged societies. Sport is an excellent and powerful tool to promote peace, tolerance, can bring together people of different ethnicities, nationalities, race, skin color, culture and religion, and promotes values, such as respect, honesty, and cooperation. Sport, development, and peace are linked together to help allow individuals and entities to become positive agents of change in society (Coakley, 2011). Mitchell et al. (2020) focused on five of the most significant relationships between sport and peace: 1. Group activity: When sport is organized as a group activity, it may facilitate contact between people from different identity backgrounds that is probably the most widely recognized mode in which sport may contribute to peace. 2. Ruled-based play: Sport, as activity which is governed by rules, may have the effect of inculcating democratic norms and values, promoting tolerance, fairness, and peace. 3. Mass entertainment: Sport, as an entertainment show that can attract the interest of many people, provides a platform for symbolic expressions of unity and improved inter-group relationships. 4. Socialization: Sport, as a forum for socialization and social participation of individuals, may help to an inclusive society that is an important part of the peace agenda.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 K. Hozhabri et al., Sport for Sustainable Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06489-0_7

87

88

7

Sport for Peace and Integration

5. Physical activity: Participation in physical activity generally affects the wellbeing of the individual that is interwoven with the well-being of society and reduction of violence. Growing sports movements for peace have marked a new era in which sport as part of a global structure of development can be organized as a means to engage in positive capacity building and become a resource to support human life after instances of violence, genocide, discrimination, and terrorism. The use of sport for development and peace in the international context has been described by Ban Ki-moon the United Nations Secretary-General where he notes that: Sport is increasingly recognized as an important tool in helping the United Nations achieve its objectives, in particular the Millennium Development Goals. By including sport in development and peace programs in a more systematic way, the United Nations can make full use of this cost-efficient tool to help us create a better world. (SportDev, 2012)

The idea of sport as a peace-promoting device is most strongly encapsulated in the Olympic movement and the Olympic truce (Höglund & Sundberg, 2008). These ideas have also found expression in the UN Millennium Goals and recently in the 2030 agenda for sustainable development goals, especially SDG 16. According to the Commonwealth Analysis (2015), high-profile sports events, teams, and role models, as platforms can promote messages of peace and inclusion and contribute to SDG 16 targets. However, it should be noted that sports have also been the arena of unethical or controversial behavior, abuse, racism, discrimination, doping, and exploitation of young athletes. Sport events have been triggering factors in some international conflicts. An example is the so-called Football War between El Salvador and Honduras in the 1960s. Another is the outbreak of the Yugoslav war in the 1990s, preceded by a club football game in 1990 which turned into a violent, ethnic riot (Höglund & Sundberg, 2008). In the following, we will address these aspects of sport in framework of SDG 16 targets. This chapter will first briefly outline the definition of peace. As a second step, it will expand on the involvement of the UN in sport-based peace projects to enhance the peace building in the societies. In the third and final step, the different contribution of sport to SDG 16 and its target is described.

What Is Peace? Peace is a complex concept that embraces a variety of meanings from “the absence of war” to “a state of equilibrium and tranquility,” and many things in between (Schulenkorf & Adair, 2013). Jeong (2000) posited, peace in the absence of war or something more aspirational, such as making positive steps toward increasing safety and justice (Levine, 2018). Christie (2006) defines peace as “an active construct, characterized by friendly and cooperative relations between peoples, and nations and a process thought to be dependent upon the satisfaction of needs for all people” (Webb & Richelieu, 2015). Gilbert and Bennett (2012) settled peace on a broad

UN, Peace, and Sport

89

definition describing peace as a “process-oriented pattern of the international system, which is marked by decreasing violence and increasing distributive justice.” Finally, peace refers to the process of decreasing violence and increasing distributive justice within a society. Wilson (2012) states, two types of peace exist: (a) Negative peace—which solely consists of “the absence of war,” in other words, a context that would have the presence of many unbalanced conditions for development, but would not be faced with violent conflict could be described as a negative peace environment. (b) positive peace implies “situations where various forms of equality and equity—related to economic, social, cultural, and political rights—have been approached.” Actually, in positive peace, there needs to be not only an absence of violent conflict but also an absence of unbalanced conditions for development as well. In other words, a society would need to be free from racism, class inequities, sexism, corruption, criminal activities, and other forms of systemic and structural violence that contribute to poverty and unequal treatment based on sex, religion, ethnic background, etc. Agger (2001) proposes that cooperating and well-functioning communities are essential to building political and economic institutions, which in turn may contribute to transforming negative peace into positive peace. Galtung (1996) identifies the interrelationship between visible and less visible violence. He argues that in order to achieve sustainable peace it is necessary to address less visible violence (Sugden, 2013). Smith (2004) argues that peace building goes beyond a simple mechanical application of methods. The rich and complex context in which peace-building agents operate may require a subtler approach than a one-size-fits-all (Webb & Richelieu, 2015). Lederach (1997) highlighted several key attributes of any peace building intervention, whether built on sport or on other strategies: • Peace building is not exclusively, or even primarily, about creating or sustaining outcomes, but rather about building processes for social change. • Peace building occurs at multiple levels (local, regional, state). • Pursuing change requires vision and securing a shared vision in a conflicted population requires thoughtful action, persistence, courage, and patience. • Conflict is based on relationships. • Violence is sustained by ingrained social patterns and these are not likely to change overnight. • Change occurs through sustained initiatives. • Outcomes may include “things that are not immediately visible,” such as relationship-building processes (Schnitzer et al., 2013).

UN, Peace, and Sport The United Nation’s involvement with the sport and peace, especially through Olympic Movement; which promotes the Olympic Ideals (excellence, participation, peace, friendship, respect), raises awareness especially among the UN member

90

7 Sport for Peace and Integration

countries, about power and ability of sport to support prevention of conflicts and promote peace. In this regard, United Nations has adopted several resolutions such as The A/RES/48/10 resolution on “International Year of Sport and the Olympic Ideal,” in which the UN recognized that “the goal of the Olympic Movement is to build a peaceful and better world by educating the youth of the world through sport and culture” (UNGA, 1993). In the following, the UN proclaimed 1994 as the International Year of Sport and the Olympic Ideal. Also, A/RES/48/11 resolution on “Observance of the Olympic Truce,” which revived the ancient Greek tradition of Ekecheiria (Olympic Truce) (Ubaidulloev, 2018). After the adoption of Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in 2000, the United Nations as part of its policy recommendations on sport and peace, has recommended to include sport as a tool in the strategies of governments to prevent conflicts and build peace. In 2006, the Department of Peacekeeping Operations, the UN Office on Sport Development and Peace and the International Olympic Committee (IOC) formed a partnership to use sport in the peacemaking framework of UN peacekeeping operations. Three missions were chosen as locations for pilot sport and peace projects—namely the UN Mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo (MONUC), the UN Operation in Côte d’Ivoire (UNOCI), and the UN Mission in Liberia (UNMIL) (Woodhouse, 2019). Many UN initiatives with partnership of organizations such as government institutions, sport federations, and NGOs, have implemented sports-related development and peace-building projects in many parts of the world, from Gaza to South African townships (Dienes, 2012). The specific targets and objectives of projects and programs that include sport as a tool for peace promotion are very diverse as the context in which the projects are operating and the targets that they aim to achieve. UNESCO as the UN organization has also recognized the role of sport in promoting dialogue, cooperation, and peace between nations. The example of UNESCO’s Sport for Peace initiatives and projects: Sport for Peace in Central American countries. The project was established with the aim of promoting physical education and sport, as a tool for prevention of violence, crime, and drug use. Sport for Peace in ECOWAS (Economic Community of West African States) countries. The aim of this project was to use sport for unity and cooperation in West Africa. These countries have cultural and geopolitical ties and shared common economic interests. DIAMBARS. A social and sports project was established in 1997. It involved establishing a football school for training and educating the children in Senegal and also contributing to the development in Africa (Ubaidulloev, 2018). In Somalia, UNICEF and UNESCO have delivered sports programs that train young people in peaceful conflict resolution skills and support inter-district and regional sport-peace tournaments, helping to rehabilitate and reintegrate young people living in a post-conflict situation. Numerous other initiatives, such as Football4Peace in Israel-Palestine and Ireland, and Fight4Peace in Brazil and the United Kingdom, along with international organizations, such as the International Olympic Truce Foundation, Peace and Sport, and Right To Play, are currently

Contribution of Sport to SDG 16 Targets

91

utilizing sport to promote tolerance and a sense of togetherness in divided communities around the world (Conrad & White, 2016). UN actions are not limited to the sport-based initiatives; the UN Postal Administration (UNPA), in a partnership with International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the United Nations Office on Sport for Development and Peace (UNOSDP), during the Rio 2016 Games, launched a series of stamps depicting sport events, the Olympic rings and the slogan in four languages: “Sport for Peace,” “Le sport pour la Paix,” “Sport für den Frieden,” and “Sport per la Pace” to retain the shared values of the two important organizations in the international community—UN and IOC for promoting sport for peace in the world (Ubaidulloev, 2018).

Contribution of Sport to SDG 16 Targets The contribution of sport to SDG 16 can consider in two ways. First to employ sport as a tool to contribute to reducing violence and promoting peace. As many UN initiatives take advantage of this approach. However, sport can also be a site for disrespect, exploitation, and violence. The second approach is directed toward reducing these problems within sport. Commonwealth Secretariat (2015) analyzed the possible contribution of sport-based approaches to SDG 16 across three main areas: First, the targets related to “reducing all forms of violence” (Target 16.1); second, a specific focus on reducing gender-based violence and the abuse or exploitation of children taking part in sport (Target 16.2); and third, targets prioritizing the importance of effective, accountable, and transparent institutions, in this case sporting institutions (Targets 16.5, 16.6, and 16.7). In the following, we are going to explain the potential contribution of sport to these targets: Target 16.1 Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere. The relations between sport and violence, revolves around the idea that this activity may be instrumental in preventing deviant and antisocial behavior as well as it can potentially assist in the rehabilitation of offenders (Cardenas, 2012). In different contexts, sport has been used towards various objectives associated with peace and violence reduction. Sport governing bodies such as the International Olympic Committee (IOC) insist that sporting events and movements function to promote peace, tolerance, and internationalism among participants and viewers (Giulianotti, 2011). Using high-profile athletes, sporting teams, and events to promote messages of peace, inclusion, and tolerance can contribute to target 16.1. National teams and athletes can serve to cultivate collective identities within countries that have suffered from societal divisions (Lindsey & Chapman, 2017). Wilson et al. (2015) argue that the apparent effectiveness of the athletes in mobilizing resources, pursuing political opportunities, and devising a collective action frame is possible because of the active involvement in and personal investment of the athletes in the peace-promoting activities.

92

7

Sport for Peace and Integration

Table 7.1 Key pillars in the development, adoption, and implementation of safeguards for children in sport Pillar Cultural sensitivity Holistic Incentives Leadership Dynamic Resources Engaging stakeholders Networks

Description The safeguards need to be tailored to the cultural and social norms of the context Safeguarding should be viewed as integrated into all aspects of an organization as opposed to being an additional element There needs to be a clear reason for individuals and an organization to work toward the safeguards The safeguards need to have strong support from those working in key leadership roles Safeguarding systems need to be continually reviewed and adapted to maintain their relevance and effectiveness The implementation of the safeguards needs to be supported by appropriate resources (e.g., human, time, and financial) A democratic approach should be adopted which invites and listens to the voices of those in and around the sport (e.g., parents, coaches, and community leaders An organization’s progress toward the safeguards will be strengthened by developing networks with other organizations

Source: Mountjoy et al. (2015)

Target 16.2 End abuse, exploitation, trafficking, and all forms of violence against and torture of children. While sport is often a site for positive societal impact, it can also be a site for abuse and exploitation. Research has demonstrated that anyone can be a perpetrator of violence in sport including coaches, parents, and peers. Traditionally, research focused on the coach as the perpetrator and the athlete as the victim. Recent research has revealed that in some forms of violence, such as bullying and hazing, peers are most often the perpetrators (Mountjoy et al., 2015). However, this target emphasized on children’s protection. Children participating in sport, especially girls, can be particularly vulnerable because of their potential reliance on the support of coaches and others in positions of influence (Lang & Hartill, 2014). Safeguarding principles developed by the International Safeguarding Children in Sport Founders Group are presented along with eight underlying pillars which underpin the successful adoption and implementation of safeguarding strategies (Table 7.1). This safeguarding model is designed to assist sport organizations in the creation of a safe sporting environment to ensure that the child athlete can flourish and reach their athletic potential through an enjoyable experience (Mountjoy et al., 2015). Target 16.5 Substantially reduce corruption and bribery in all their forms. Target 16.6 Develop effective, accountable, and transparent institutions at all levels. Target 16.7 Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory, and representative decision-making at all levels.

Summary

93

Various forms of corruption, bribery, doping, the manipulation of sporting competitions, and financial misappropriation have become increasingly prominent within sport that threaten the integrity of sport (Lindsey & Chapman, 2017). The Berlin Declaration has emphasized the need for government officials and other stakeholders to address these threats (UNESCO, 2013). Sport organizations are under intense pressure to take steps to restore public trust and reduce the risk of further unethical behavior. In this regard, Sport organizations would reform their governance. Although structures and institutions differ across sports and from international to national and local levels (Chappelet & Mrkonjic, 2013), there is increasing acceptance and harmonization of principles for good governance in sport. These principles include democratic appointment and decision-making processes; accountability within and beyond the organization; transparency in respect of financial and other matters; integrity and the adoption of codes of ethics; and solidarity across different levels and aspects of sport (IOC, 2008; Commonwealth Secretariat, 2016). The European Commission (2013) issued a list of principles of good governance in sport that include: (1) Clarity of purpose/objectives; (2) Code of ethics; (3) Stakeholder identification and roles; (4) Democracy and minimum standards; (5) Delegation and committees; (6) Management; (7) Judicial/disciplinary procedures; (8) Inclusivity and youth engagement; (9) Statutes, rules, and regulations; and (10) Accountability and transparency—each of which contains two or more components (Chappelet & Mrkonjic, 2019). In 2016, The Sport Integrity Global Alliance (SIGA) published the Declaration of Core Principles on Sport Integrity. According to the declaration, the core principles of “good governance” include upholding the “universal principles of sports ethics such as fair play, solidarity, respect for human rights, dignity, integrity and diversity, and rejection of any form of discrimination,” and maintaining “the highest governance standards,” most notably “democratic and transparent electoral processes, term limits, separation of powers between their regulatory and commercial functions, monitoring of potential conflicts of interest, risk management procedures, gender equality at the board level, independent directors, meaningful stakeholder representation in the decision-making organs, transparent and accountable financial management, and proper oversight” (Sport Integrity Global Alliance, 2016).

Summary Community sport has earned a place on the global agendas and is increasingly being integrated, particularly in the developing world or in divided societies, in community development strategies to contribute to reconciliation and peace (Van, dissertation). Sport-based programs can provide an environment for disparate groups to find common ground, share experiences and engage in constructive dialogue which can potentially lead to mutual respect and a more peaceful and inclusive community. Peace is hugely complex that is not merely absence of violence, peace is taught, learned, and transmitted. The United Nations played a significant role in sport-based

94

7

Sport for Peace and Integration

interventions aimed at reducing crime, improving life chances, and building cohesion in communities affected by high levels of deprivation and social problems. In different projects, sport, and most notably football in its condition as the planet’s most popular game, has recently been validated by the international community as a catalyst for social inclusion, reconciliation, and peace building (Cardenas, 2012). In Sport-based project, contribution to SDG 16 can consider both through and within sport. Sport initiatives can help to overcome conflict identities by harmonizing group relationships and restoring positive, co-operative interaction, and crisscrossing loyalties spanning the in-group/out-group divide (Höglund & Sundberg, 2008). Also, sport may contribute to SDG 16 targets by reducing various forms of violence, corruption, and bribery within sport. However, sport cannot enforce or maintain peace lonely and must be integrated into a larger agenda supported by both society and the governing political institutions to make a significant contribution toward promoting cultural understanding and providing reconciliation or peace in divided societies.

References Agger, I. (2001). Reducing trauma during ethno-political conflict: A personal account of psychosocial work under war conditions in Bosnia. In D. J. Christie, R. V. Wagner, & D. D. Winter (Eds.), Peace, conflict, and violence: Peace psychology for the 21st century. Prentice-Hall. Cardenas, A. (2012). Exploring the use of sports for peacebuilding and conflict resolution. Archbishop Desmond Tutu Centre for War and Peace Studies, Liverpool Hope University. Chappelet, J.-L., & Mrkonjic, M. (2013). The basic principles of governance in international sport (BIBGIS): An assessment tool for international sport governing bodies. IDHEAP Working Paper 1/2013. IDHEAP. Chappelet, J. L., & Mrkonjic, M. (2019). Assessing sport governance principles and Indicators. In M. Winand & C. Anagnostopoulos (Eds.), Research handbook on sport governance. Edward Elgar. Christie, D. J. (2006). What is peace psychology the psychology of? Journal of Social Issues, 62(1), 1–17. Coakley, J. (2011). Youth sports: What counts as “positive development?”. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 35(3), 306–324. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193723511417311 Commonwealth Secretariat. (2015). Sport for development and peace and the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. Commonwealth Secretariat. Commonwealth Secretariat. (2016). Policy guidance to commonwealth governments on protecting the integrity of sport. Retrieved from http://thecommonwealth.org/sites/default/files/inline/ Policy%20Guidance%20to%20Commonwealth%20Governments%20on%20Protecting%20 the%20Integrity%20of%20Sport%202016.pdf Conrad, D., & White, A. (2016). Introduction to sport and public health. In D. Conrad & A. White (Eds.), Sports-based health interventions: Case studies from around the world. Springer. https:// doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5996-5 Dienes, E. (2012). How sport can contribute to peace-building perspectives of the United Nations on sport as a tool for promoting peace. In K. In Gilbert & W. Bennett (Eds.), Sport, peace, and development (pp. 39–51). Common Ground Publishing LLC. European Commission. (2013). Deliverable 2: Principles of good governance in sport, European Union Work Plan for Sport 2011–2014. European Commission.

References

95

Galtung, J. (1996). Peace by peaceful means. Peace and conflict, development and civilization. Sage. Gilbert, K., & Bennett, W. (2012). Sport, peace & development. Common Ground Publishing, LLC. Giulianotti, R. (2011). Sport, peacemaking and conflict resolution: A contextual analysis and modelling of the sport, development and peace sector. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 34(2), 207–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2010.522245 Höglund, K., & Sundberg, R. (2008). Reconciliation through Sports? The Case of South Africa, Third World Quarterly, 29(4), 805–818. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436590802052920 International Olympic Committee (IOC). (2008). Basic universal principles of good governance of the Olympic and sports movement. Retrieved from http://www.olympic.org/Documents/ Conferences_Forums_and_Events/2008_seminar_autonomy/Basic_Universal_Principles_of_ Good_Governance.pdf Jeong, H. W. (2000). Peace and conflict studies: An introduction. Ashgate. Lang, M., & Hartill, M. (2014). Safeguarding, child protection and abuse in sport: International perspectives in research, Policy and Practice. Routledge. Lederach, J. (1997). Building peace: Sustainable reconciliation in divided societies. United States Institute of Peace. Levine, J. F. (2018). Exploring the capabilities approach in a sport for development and peace setting. A PhD dissertation, Faculty of the College of Education and Human Development, University of Louisville. Lindsey, I., & Chapman, T. (2017). Enhancing the contribution of sport to the sustainable development goals. Commonwealth Secretariat. MacAloon, J. (1995). Interval training. In S. L. Foster (Ed.), Choreographing history (pp. 32–53). Indiana University Press. Mitchell, D., Somerville, I., Hargie, O., & Simms, V. (2020). Can sport build peace after conflict? Public attitudes in transitional Northern Ireland. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 45, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193723520958346 Mountjoy, M., Rhind, D. J. A., Tiivas, A., & Leglise, M. (2015). Safeguarding the child athlete in sport: A review a framework and recommendations for the IOC youth athlete development model. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 49, 883–886. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports2015-094619 Schnitzer, M., Stephenson, M., Zanotti, L., & Stivachtis, Y. (2013). Theorizing the role of sport for development and peacebuilding. Sport in Society: Cultures, Commerce, Media, Politics, 16(5), 595–610. https://doi.org/10.1080/17430437.2012.690410 Schulenkorf, N., & Adair, D. (2013). Global sport-for development: Critical perspectives. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137289636 Smith, D. (2004). Towards a strategic framework for peacebuilding: Getting their ACT together, Royal Norwegian ministry of foreign affairs. SportDev.Org. (2012). The international platform for sport and development. http://www. sportanddev.org Sport Integrity Global Alliance. (2016). Declaration of core principles on sport integrity. Retrieved September 13, 2017, from http://www.theicss.org/images/uploads/SIGA_-_Declaration_of_ Principles_on_Sport_Integrity_-_8_April_FINAL. pdf?lbisphpreq¼1 Sugden, J. (2013). The ripple effect: Critical pragmatism, conflict resolution and peace building through sport in deeply divided societies. In N. Schulenkorf & D. Adair (Eds.), Global sport-for development: Critical perspectives. Palgrave Macmillan. Ubaidulloev, Z. (2018). Sport for peace: A new era of international cooperation and peace through sport. Asia-Pacific Review, 25(2), 104–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/13439006.2018.1548818 UNESCO. (2013). Declaration of Berlin. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0022/002211/221114 e.pdf

96

7

Sport for Peace and Integration

United Nations, General Assembly (UNGA). (1993). Forty-eighth session, Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 October 1993 A/RES/48/10 “International Year of Sport and the Olympic Ideal.” http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/48/a48r010.htm Webb, J., & Richelieu, A. (2015). Sport for development and peace snakes and ladders. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 18(3), 278–297. Wilson, B. (2012). Sport & peace: A sociological perspective. Oxford University Press. Wilson, B., Van Luijik, N., Boit, M., & K. (2015). When celebrity athletes are ‘social movement entrepreneurs’: A study of the role of elite runners in run-for peace events in post-conflict Kenya in 2008. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 50(8), 929–957. https://doi.org/10. 1177/1012690213506005 Woodhouse, T. (2019). SDP and peace. In H. Collison, S. C. Darnell, R. Giulianotti, & D. Howe (Eds.), Routledge handbook of sport for development and peace (pp. 265–274). Routledge.