Public-Private Partnerships in the Promotion of Sport and Well-being: A governance (original) (raw)
Related papers
Public-private partnerships in the promotion of sport and well-being : a governance model
Qut Business School School of Management, 2010
This research focuses on exploring the links between sport, Indigenous self determination and deeper engagement within mainstream Australia especially with regard to the issue of promoting healthy lifestyles and the role of governance, through sport governance. Against all social, economic and health criteria Indigenous Australians are disadvantaged -despite government attention and financial input. It is well understood that education is a basis to better health, employment and lifestyle . However, many of the issues confronting Indigenous people have not responded to conventional government approaches based on program development and policy initiatives from single organisations . As a consequence, new approaches that both tap into the specific interests of Indigenous people and better engage them in the process of governance are required. The case material of the research focuses on the Australian Football League (AFL) Kickstart program.
Whose Job Is It Anyway? Public-Private Partnerships in Youth Sport
Managing Sport & Leisure
In the United States, youth sport programs delivered by public recreation agencies face increased pressure to either increase fees or “contract out” to private providers to compensate for budget reductions. Understanding these private-public partnerships (PPPs) is essential to the sustainability of youth sport. This study contributes to that objective by analyzing the perceptions of PPPs involving public recreation agencies and private youth sport providers. Using a qualitative interpretive approach, data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 22 administrators in youth sport programs, including 12 from public recreation departments and 10 from outside organizations. Thematic analysis was utilized to uncover the perceptions of both sides of these PPPs. Guided by principal-agency and stewardship theory, results are organized across three partnership phases 1. initiation, 2. management; and 3. outcomes) to help inform best practices and identify barriers to effective collaboration (Jensen & Meckling, 1976; Gazley & Brudney, 2007; Caers et al., 2006).
The Importance of Public- Private Partnership in the Accompaniment of Sport Projects
Sport Science and Human Health, 2021
Over the past decades, the sport industry has changed and transformed. The growing sophistication in terms of infrastructure and scientific and technical support needs, the increased visibility of competitive sports and the emergence of sport as a lucrative sector have given credence to the public-private partnership initiative. Thus, various agreements concluded between public institutions and private companies have been put in place during the last decade in Morocco to promote the development of new projects, including sports facilities. Several forms of partnership have been adopted. In this context, the public-private partnership is presented as a hybrid organizational agreement between the public sector and private initiatives in the launch of the Hassan II Park, a project with a triple sporting-societal-tourism vocation launched by King Mohamed 6 in 2014 and inaugurated in November 2018.
Research question: Sport-for-development programs often rely on a community and external-agency partnership. This study explored how the community-external-agency partnership attempted to use a high cost sport of ice-hockey to create sustainable community development outcomes. Research methods: The evolution of the partnership between the external-agency Right To Play and the community of Moose Cree First Nation in the Province of Ontario, Canada is examined. Data included 35 semi-structured interviews from community (n = 26) and external-agency (n = 9) partnership stakeholders, combined with non-participant observations of ice-hockey clinics and organizational document reviews. Results and findings: Findings provide several insights regarding resource acquisition and flow. The study found that the choice of sport is critical to initiate desired community change. Findings also indicated several challenges in program funding, human resource management, and communication highlighting the importance of sustainable resource planning. Implications: The sport of ice-hockey acted as an initial hook to mobilize community members' interest and gain outside organizations' resources. The findings denote differences in partner objectives which can complicate the delivery of programming. Sustaining the sport of ice-hockey within the community took on a more traditional sport development outcome. Ultimately, resource availability and acquisition (tangible and intangible) within a sport-for-development partnership must be considered before embarking on a program. Articulating a sustainable strategy where the external agency has a planned withdraw date and the community can independently continue programming if deemed desirable is important. Partnerships mutually benefit when there are clearly stated and communicated objectives.
Governance and the Challenge of Development through Sports: A Framework for Action
Previous papers such as Russell, Barrios & Andrews (2016), Guerra (2016), and Russell, Tokman, Barrios & Andrews (2016) have aimed to provide an empirical view into the sports economy. This proves to be a difficult task, given the many definitions of ‘sports’ and data deficiencies and differences in the sports domain (between contexts and over time). The emerging view in these previous papers provides interesting information about the sports sector, however: it shows, for instance, that different contexts have differently intensive sports sectors, and that sports activities overlap with other parts of the economy. This kind of information is useful for policymakers in governments trying to promote sports activities and use sports to advance the cause of broad-based social and economic development. This paper is written with these policymakers in mind. It intends to offer a guide such agents can use in constructing sports policies focused on achieving development goals (what we call development through sports[1]), and discusses ways in which these policymakers can employ empirical evidence to inform such policies. The paper draws on the concept of ‘governance’ to structure its discussion. Taking a principal-agent approach to the topic, governance is used here to refer to the exercise of authority, by one set of agents, on behalf of another set of agents, to achieve specific objectives. Building on such a definition, the paper looks at the way governmental bodies engage in sports when acting to further the interests of citizens, most notably using political and executive authority to promote social and economic development. This focus on governance for development through sports (asking why and how governments use authority to promote sports for broader social and economic development objectives[2]) is different from governance of sports (which focuses on how governments and other bodies exercise authority to control and manage sports activities themselves), which others explore in detail but we will not discuss.[3] The paper has five main sections. A first section defines what we mean by ‘governance’ in the context of this study. It describes an ends-means approach to the topic—where we emphasize understanding the goals of governance policy (or governance ends) and then thinking about the ways governments try to achieve such goals (the governance means). The discussion concludes by asking what the governance ends and means are in a development through sports agenda. The question is expanded to ask whether one can use empirical evidence to reflect on such ends and means. One sees this, for instance, in the use of 'governance indicators' and 'governance dashboards' in the international development domain. A second section details the research method we used to address these questions. This mixed method approach started by building case studies of sports policy interventions in various national and sub-national governments to obtain a perspective on what these policies tend to involve (across space and time). It then expanded into an analysis of sports policies in a broad set of national and sub-national governments to identify common development through sport ends and means. Finally, it involved experimentation with selected data sources to show how the ends and means might be presented in indicators and dashboards—to offer evidence-based windows into development through sports policy regimes. Based on this research, sections three and four discuss the governance ends and means commonly pursued and employed by governments in this kind of policy process. The sections identify three common ends (or goals)—inclusion, economic growth, and health—and a host of common means—like the provision of sports facilities, organized activities, training support, financial incentives, and more—used in fostering a development through sports agenda. Data are used from local authorities in England to show the difficulties of building indicators reflecting such policy agendas, but also to illustrate the potential value of evidence-based dashboards of these policy regimes. It needs to be stated that this work is more descriptive than analytical, showing how data can be used to provide an evidence-based perspective on this domain rather than formally testing hypotheses about the relationship between specific policy means and ends. In this regard, the work is more indicative of potential applications rather than prescriptive. A conclusion summarizes the discussion and presents a model for a potential dashboard of governance in a development through sports policy agenda. [1] This terminology comes from Houlihan and White, who identify the “tension between development through sport (with the emphasis on social objectives and sport as a tool for human development) and development of sport (where sport was valued for its own sake)” (Houlihan & White 2002, 4). [2] The paper relates to a vibrant literature on this topic, which investigates the reasons and ways governments support the sports sector (classic and recent studies in this literature include Adams and Harris (2014), Gerretsenand Rosentraub (2015), Grix and Carmichael (2012), Grix (2015), Hallman and Petry (2013), Houlihan (2002, 2005, 2016), Houlihan and White (2002), Hylton (2013), Koski and Lämsä (2015), Schulenkorf and Adair (2013), and Vuori et al. (1995). [3] Work on the governance of sports assesses the way international entities like FIFA and the IOC work with national and local governmental bodies to oversee, regulate, and otherwise manage sports like football and the Olympic movement, using authority to create and implement rules on behalf of those involved in the sport itself. See, for instance Forster (2006), Geeraert (2013), and Misener (2014).
Sport-for-Change: Some Thoughts from a Sceptic
Social Inclusion, 2015
Sport’s historic attraction for policy makers has been its claims that it can offer an economy of remedies to seemingly intractable social problems—“social inclusion”, “development”. Such usually vague and ill-defined claims reflect sport’s marginal policy status and its attempts to prove its more general relevance. The dominance of evangelical beliefs and interest groups, who tend to view research in terms of affirmation of their beliefs, is restricting conceptual and methodological development of policy and practice. There is a need to de-reify “sport” and to address the issue of sufficient conditions—the mechanisms, processes and experiences which might produce positive impacts for some participants. This requires researchers and practitioners to develop approaches based on robust and systematic programme theories. However, even if systematic and robust evidence is produced for the relative effectiveness of certain types of programme, we are left with the problem of displacement ...
The Role of Local Authorities in Supporting Youth and Sports Activities. Case Study
Journal of Public Administration, Finance and Law, 2018
Sport is a vector of social cohesion that demands from the state and local authorities intelligent and strategic sports policies based on an inclusive sporting governance model adapted to its own socio-cultural identity. However, the Eurobarometer on Sport and Physical Activity (2013) for the 28 Member States shows that 59% of Europeans don't do sports or never carry out sporting activities, thus causing a negative impact on the health of the population and on the socio-economic level, given that sport has an important place in the European economy (3.65% of European GDP), providing jobs for 5.4% of the working population. From this perspective, the present paper performs a comparative analysis centered on the support mechanisms granted by the EU Member States to physical education and sport, focusing on the financing of sport clubs and the employment of athletes during sporting activities or after its conclusion. For the comparative analysis, the paper selected a number of EU M...
2017
Based on a brief review of literature and consideration of the findings the following recommendations are made: Clarifying roles and purpose Recommendation 1: The role and function of Sport Wales should be clarified so as to establish understanding concerning its place and relevance within the Welsh sporting landscape. Recommendation 2: An inclusive consultation exercise conducted with stakeholders delivering sport programmes would help identify key strengths and weaknesses in the present system and identify gaps, opportunities and methods to enhance delivery. Specific consultation with HEI institutions to explore the opportunities and challenges of adopting an RSA approach which emphasizes HEI institutions. Creating conditions for stability and success Recommendation 3: Introducing longer term funding cycles would provider certainty and confidence for deliverers to work towards longer term outcomes. Recommendation 4: Funding approaches that are competitive and which provide flexibility may drive innovation and best practice. Clear agreements on performance would promote efficiency and productivity. Recommendation 5: The skills and expertise of sports bodies, including sports clubs and universities should be harnessed to create strong relationships between diverse stakeholders. Engaging and utilizing the strengths of non-sport bodies and professionals from other sectors would help enhance and consolidate these relationships. Recommendation 6: Regional approaches such as RSAs should act as facilitators with respect to building networks, promoting best practice, promoting collaborative approaches and supporting evidence-based approaches. Building effective partnerships Recommendation 7: An effective means of communication between diverse stakeholders should be established to provide a basis for managing complex relationships. RSAs might perform this function. Recommendation 8: The benefits of partnership working should be clearly articulated, promoted and grounded in reality i.e. support, funding, goal attainment. Recommendation 9: Formalizing partnerships through plans, structures and processes and expectations would help maximize effectiveness via: agreeing complementary approaches; encouraging and supporting the active participation of stakeholders, and promoting approaches which are sensitive to local needs and preferences. Demonstrating impact Recommendation 10: Monitoring and evaluation should seek to establish local level evidence of impact that reflects the diverse nature of sports development initiatives. 10 5.0 Discussion and recommendations This section provides a brief discussion of the qualitative data in the context of the existing literature and makes a series of recommendations for consideration.