Internationalization, competitiveness and performance in athletics (1984–2006)

Abstract

This study examines whether a process of internationalization has affected the level of athletic performance amongst high-level athletes competing on the world stage. Top 100 International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) rankings were compared at two time points: 1984 and 2006, by event and by gender. We identified internationalization as a determinant of the level of athletic performances. This level increased more in events that witnessed more important shifts in market shares (dynamic internationalization or competitiveness) and where dominance by a subset of countries (static internationalization) decreased. This internationalization clearly affects performances in men's athletics (as the performance has clearly gone up since 1984), but not in women's athletics. Here the general level of women's athletics has actually decreased.

Notes

¹ De Bosscher et al. , A Global Sporting Arms Race.

² Van Bottenburg, Global Games.

³ Van Bottenburg, Global Games

⁴ Dejonghe, Sport in de Wereld.

⁵ Shibli and Bingham, ‘An Evaluation of Medal-Based Measures of Performance’.

⁶ Van Bottenburg, Global Games.

⁷ Dejonghe, Sport in de Wereld.

⁸ Guttmann, Games and Empires.

⁹ Giulianotti and Robertson, Globalization and Sport.

¹⁰ Maguire, Global Sport.

¹¹ Du Bois and Heyndels, ‘Internationalization in Athletics’.

¹² Chamerois, ‘The Globalisation of the Olympic Games’.

¹³ The number includes both male and female events and does not include the relays. The number of performances falls short of the number of events × 100 because in a number of instances the IAAF ranking did not give 100 athletes.

¹⁴ Du Bois and Heyndels, ‘Internationalization in Athletics’.

¹⁵ Clarke and Davies, ‘Aggregate Concentration’.

¹⁶ Deutsch and Silber, ‘Static Versus Dynamic Measures of Aggregate Concentration’.

¹⁷ Du Bois and Heyndels, ‘Internationalization in Athletics’.

¹⁸ Hymer and Pashigian, ‘Turnover of Firms as Measure of Market Behaviour’.

¹⁹ Hymer and Pashigian, ‘Turnover of Firms as Measure of Market Behaviour’

²⁰ Hymer and Pashigian, ‘Turnover of Firms as Measure of Market Behaviour’

²¹ Gembris, Taylor, and Suter, ‘Evolution of Athletic Records’.

²² It may be argued that athletic performances in 1984 were at a higher level because this was an Olympic year and the Games act as an incentive for individual athletes. Although the organization of the Games may indeed have a positive effect on performances, it can certainly not explain the findings in Table 4. Comparison of first ranked athletes in 1984 with IAAF rankings of 2004 (which was an Olympic year) gives similar results as those found. Indeed, in the 12 (comparable) events which were Olympic in both 1984 and 2004 we find that in 10 cases the best 1984 performance is better than the 2004 season's best. Only for hurdling (both 100 m and 400 m) was the best 2004 performance better than 20 years earlier. So, it can be concluded that the general level of elite athletic performance for women is at best stagnating over the period considered.

²³ Du Bois and Heyndels, ‘Internationalization in Athletics’.

²⁴ United Nations.

²⁵ De Bosscher et al., A Global Sporting Arms Race.

²⁶ De Bosscher, ‘Sports Policy Factors Leading to International Sporting Success’.