Causes of dysfunction in the global sports governance model
https://doi.org/10.28995/2073-6304-2024-2-8-24
Abstract
The article presents materials related to the analysis of the causes for management dysfunctions in modern sports and further prospects for the development of sports in a changing world order. Paradoxically, the beginning of the conflict in Ukraine and the subsequent reaction of sports officials of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and international sports federations (IFS) made it possible to really look at the existing models of management of individual sports and the entire Olympic system from an applied aspect.
Governance and power in sport is viewed through the lens of theories of symbolic capital, critical realism, dominance theory and the three-level dimension of power in sport.
In the analytical part, the focus is on the fact that international sport does not adhere to a unitary or federal model of governance, but corresponds to the principles of a polycentric management system, since power in sport is asymmetrical and dispersed across separately established bodies with overlapping jurisdictions, which are not always in a hierarchical relationship with each other. That is why IOC President Thomas Bach made recommendations to remove Russian and Belarusian athletes from international competitions, cancel competitions on the territory of these countries and ban Russian and Belarusian state symbols. The IOC leadership has no other management levers to make decisions.
The author identified that dysfunctions in the management model led to the dependence of the Olympic movement on American capital and unfair distribution of income; creating a trend towards the development of regional sports projects and the formation of a new geopolitical economy of sports.
About the Author
S. V. Altukhov
HSE University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Sergey V. Altukhov, Cand. of Sci. (Economics)
bld. 11, Pokrovskii Вoulevard, Moscow, 109028
References
1. Abbott, K. and Snidal, D. (2000), “Hard and soft law in international governance”, International Organization, no 54 (3), pp. 421–456.
2. Aleksunin, V. and Baskakov, V. (2016), Marketing approach to the sports industry management, RSUH/RGGU Bulletin. “Economics. Management. Law” Series, no. 3, pp. 92–101.
3. Altukhov, S. and Nauright, J. (2018), “The new sporting Cold War. Implications of the Russian doping allegations for international relations and sport”, Sport in Society, vol. 21, pp. 1120–1136.
4. Bergsgard, N.A. (2018), “Power and domination in sport policy and politics: three intertwined levels of exercising power”, International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, no. 10 (4), pp. 653–667. DOI: http://dx.doi.org10.1080/19406940.2018.1490335.
5. Bhaskar, R. (1997), The realist theory of science, Verso, London, UK.
6. Black, J. (2008), “Constructing and contesting legitimacy and accountability in polycentric regulatory regimes”, Regulation and Governance, no. 2, pp. 137–164.
7. Bourdieu, P. (1978), “Sport and social class”, Social Science Information, no 17.
8. Bourdieu, P. (2002), “Forms of Capital”, Journal of Economic Sociology, vol. 3, no. 5, pp. 60–74.
9. Bourdieu, P. (1994), Nachala [Beginnings], Shmatko, N.A. (transl.), Socio-Logos, Moscow, Russia.
10. Bourg, J.-F. (2016), “Dopage et mondialisation financière du sport: ce que nous apprend l’analyse économique”, Drogues, santé et société, no. 15 (1), pp. 66–84.
11. Casini, L. (2015), “The emergence of global administrative systems: The case of sport. Glocalism”, Journal of Culture, Politics and Innovation, no. 1, https://doi. org/10.12893/gjcpi.2015.1.4.
12. Chadwick, S. (2022), “From utilitarianism and neoclassical sport management to a new geopolitical economy of sport”, European Sport Management Quarterly, no. 22 (5), pp. 685–704.
13. Geeraert, A. (2018), “The limits and opportunities of self-regulation: Achieving international sport federations’ compliance with good governance standards”, European Sport Management Quarterly, vol. 19, iss. 4, pp. 520–538. https://doi.org/10.1080/16184742.2018.1549577.
14. Henry, I. and Lee, P.C. (2004), “Governance and ethics in sport”, Chadwick, S. and Beech, J. (eds.), The Business of Sport Management, Pearson Education, Harlow, pp. 25–41.
15. Houlihan, B. (2009), “Mechanisms of international influence on domestic elite sport policy”, International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, no. 1 (1), pp. 51–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/19406940902739090.
16. Isailovic, M. and Pattberg, P. (2016), “Private governance”, Ansell, C. and Torfing, J. (eds.), Handbook on Theories of Governance, Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, pp. 468–476.
17. Krasner, S.D. (1982), “Structural causes and regime consequences: Regimes asintervening variables”, International Organization, no. 36 (2), pp. 185–205.
18. Marsh, D., Richards, D. and Smith, M. (2003), “Unequal plurality: Towards an asymmteric power model of British politics”, Government and Opposition, no. 38 (3), pp. 306–332.
19. Morris, D. (1981), The Soccer Tribe, Jonathan Cape, London, UK.
20. Ostrom, V., Tiebout, C.M. and Warren, R. (1961), “The Organization of Government in Metropolitan Areas: A Theoretical Inquiry”, American Political Science Review, vol. 55, pp. 831–842.
21. Skelcher, C. (2005), “Jurisdictional Integrity, Polycentrism, and the Design of Democratic Governance”, Governance: An International Jounal of Policy, Administration and Institutions, no. 18 (1), pp. 89–110.
22. Vogel, D. (2006), The Market for Virtue: The Potential and Limits of Corporate Social Responsibility, Brookings Institute, Washington, DC, USA.
23. Weber, M. (1968), Economy and Society, University of California Press, Berkely, USA.
Review
For citations:
Altukhov S.V. Causes of dysfunction in the global sports governance model. RSUH/RGGU BULLETIN. Series Economics. Management. Law. 2024;(2):8-24. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.28995/2073-6304-2024-2-8-24
Views:
185
Email this article 