A sport and sociocultural legacy beyond 2010: A case study of the Football Foundation of South Africa

Abstract

This study investigated the sport development and social legacy of the 2010 FIFA World Cup. It assessed the impact of an event-themed legacy project on Gansbaai, a non-host, small-town community in the Western Cape, South Africa. The Football Foundation of South Africa (FFSA) was established to capitalise on the increased excitement about football as a result of the 2010 mega-event, aiming to leave a sport and social development legacy in a region that might not otherwise directly benefit. The FFSA embarked on a project to accelerate social change and community integration in a racially divided community through sport. The short-term results indicate that the community has experienced an increased level of intangible legacies, such as youth development, social integration and community pride. The FFSA is leaving a sport and social legacy for the community beyond 2010. It will be necessary to monitor the impacts on a more long-term basis.

Keywords:

• sport development
• legacy
• mega-event
• 2010 FIFA World Cup

1. Introduction

South Africa emerged from sporting isolation in the early 1990s. The apartheid era left many negative legacies, such as divided social communities and wide inequalities in access to education, sport and facilities. Sport, and in particular sport events, played a significant role in the early transformation of South African society. Hosting, and winning, the 1995 Rugby World Cup and the 1996 African Nations Cup (football) revealed the power of sport to bring people together and heal the wounds of the past. However, the changes would take time to filter through to outlying communities like Gansbaai, the subject of our study.

In 2004 South Africa was awarded the right to host the 2010 FIFA World Cup. As this was the first mega-event of this magnitude to be held on the African continent, and one of very few hosted by a developing nation, it held much expectation and promise for the people of South Africa. It was seen as an opportunity for more meaningful reconciliation and development in South Africa and on the African continent more broadly. In its business plan, South Africa's Organising Committee stated that besides complying with FIFA's requirements it would also focus on the economic, health and safety, social and infrastructure legacy of the event (Dlamini, 2008).

Levermore (2008a) emphasises that while vague assertions are made about the contribution of sport to development, evaluation is generally lacking. He adds that independent evaluations should be encouraged as they could demonstrate best practices. Furthermore, since the idea of ‘sport for development’ is still in its infancy, it requires ongoing conceptualisation, debate and research drawing on case-specific primary data (SDP IWG, 2007). Several researchers (Preuss, 2006; Horne, 2007; Bob & Swart, 2010) argue that legacy research requires a long-term approach. However, the present study focuses on the Football Foundation of South Africa (FFSA) as an illustrative example of how event-based themed regeneration projects can be undertaken in the context of a developing country. In our case study we investigated aspects of the sport development and social legacy of the 2010 FIFA World Cup, assessing the impact of an event-themed legacy project, and in particular the impact of the FFSA on Gansbaai, a non-host, small-town coastal community in the Western Cape. Our paper examines current impacts and potential legacy outcomes – a much longer time frame will be needed to assess the long-term impacts of the project. It also provides baseline data for assessing future sport development legacy impacts.

2. Sport and development

The recognition of the role of sport in development has led to an ever-increasing number of organisations involved in a range of sport-for-development public–private partnerships (Spaaij, 2009). Sport is recognised by key policy makers as a tool for development, as evidenced by the United Nations' Year of Development and Peace through Sport in 2005 and the World Economic Forum's commitment to sport for development and peace in 2006. The UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) aim to eradicate or reduce poverty, hunger and child mortality, and promote education, maternal health, gender equality and environmental sustainability, among other things. The UN (2010) recognises sport as a viable and practical tool to help achieve these goals.

However, Levermore and Beacom (2009) observe that despite this acknowledgement from policy makers the role of sport as a potential catalyst for development has largely been absent from the social sciences literature. To signify that sport may assist the international development process, these authors use the term ‘sport in development’ rather than ‘sport for development’ or ‘sport through development’, as the impact of sport may not always be positive, especially for societies in developing countries. Levermore (2009) acknowledges that sport in development projects generally link in with the goals of neoliberalism and modernisation through strengthening physical infrastructure, establishing a stronger social and economic environment, especially employment and investment in other life skills, and encouraging private sector investment in development. However, alternative perspectives on sport in development acknowledge that sport is not always positive (Giulianotti, 2004); it can be divisive and can accentuate unequal power relations and marginalise certain groups and communities (Levermore, 2009).

Coalter (2009) further argues that policy claims about the benefits of sport are largely rhetoric, with little systematic evidence about what impact sport actually has in development programmes. He identifies two approaches to sport in development: ‘sport plus’ and ‘plus sport’. In sport-plus programmes, the development of sustainable sport organisations is of primary importance, although broader social issues can be addressed, whereas in plus-sport programmes the social and health programmes are central and sport is used to achieve some of their objectives (Coalter, 2009). In the latter approach, short-term outcomes are more important than the longer-term sustainable development of sport. Coalter explains, however, that programmes exist on a continuum and the differences are not always distinct.

According to Levermore (2008b), sport may be used as a new vehicle that complements development assistance in a number of ways, particularly in areas that traditional methods of development have had difficulty reaching. Mchombo (2006) points out that, traditionally, the dominant view of development has been in terms of economic programmes. In Africa, development has been adversely affected by factors such as chronic famine and in particular HIV/AIDS, which has forced a review of the notion of national development to include not just educating the youth but making efforts to save them, restore their health and determine ways in which they can channel their energy towards the development of the country. Consequently, their love of sport has been exploited in recent years (Mchombo, 2006). This effort is in keeping with what Cornelissen (2009) says is the most widely accepted approach to development: improving the social, cultural and economic quality of an individual life.

Keim (2003) argues that multicultural sport events have contributed to social integration in post-apartheid South Africa. Levermore (2008b) suggests that sport may be used to build social cohesion in societies tackling exclusion based on race, gender, youth and poverty, and may help in the building of physical, social and community infrastructure, which many regard as essential for successful development. South Africa's Department of Sport and Recreation is convinced that sport and recreation activities contribute to the general welfare of all South Africans and contends that this is the best way of involving youth in meaningful activities to help build communities (SRSA, 2009). Levermore contends, however, that sport cannot be regarded as a panacea for development, considering the lack of critical analysis and evidence of its effectiveness (2008a). Additionally, Sport for Development and the Peace International Working Group say the impact of a sports programme depends on the ‘priority given to the development objectives, being well-designed, embodying positive values, empowering participants, fostering local ownership, being inclusive, and ensuring a quality sport experience’, and further note that high performance sport may be unsuitable for development purposes if it focuses only on the elite athletes who participate (SDP IWG, 2008:4). Sport mega-events can be included in the category of high performance sport and, as discussed in the next section, may provide a catalyst for sport development initiatives within a broader context. However, Coalter (2009) cautions that the limitations of sport must be acknowledged and recognition needs to be given to broader policies and practices in which sport needs to be embedded if it is to boost development.

A critical analysis of the sport and development literature makes it clear that little is known about how social development takes places in and through sport. Long and Sanderson (2001) sum up by saying that the most commonly claimed social benefits of sport for a community are enhanced confidence and self-esteem, empowerment, capacity building, employment gains, and health and environmental improvements.

Confidence and self-esteem are of course individual benefits, but Long and Sanderson contend that these can be extended to the community in a range of ways, including improvements accrued from public goods, such as improved health care (summative), skills acquisition (reinvestment), and local pride (shared benefits). Involvement in sport can thus lead to positive behaviour such as a reduction in crime (consequential benefits), interaction and shared experiences (communality), increased empowerment (‘for us by us’), and an overall improvement where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts (Long & Sanderson 2001:191–2).

Burnett (2010), citing Mintzberg (2006), underscores the importance of the bottom-up (indigenous) approach to development rather than the top-down (government or globalisation) approaches[0]. The top-down approach of the School Mass Participation Programme funded and implemented by SRSA allowed for the introduction of sporting projects for a broad base but without buy-in at a local level. The outside-in approach, exemplified by the Youth Development through Football initiative funded by the GTZ (German Technical Cooperation), emphasises partnerships and stakeholder collaboration. Burnett (2010:39) says this approach requires a sensitivity and particular focus that should facilitate the development of leaders, as suggested by Mintzberg, in the communities where the programmes are being delivered.

2.1 Mega-events and their sport and social development legacies

Distinguishing features of mega-events are that they attract a large number of visitors, occur infrequently because they usually require significant public funds to stage, have significant economic and social impact, which is affected by the extent of the international dimension of the event, and attract considerable media attention at international level (Getz, 1997; Hall & Hodges, 1998).

Cornelissen (2009) observes that there have been a few significant shifts in the mega-event literature in relation to development, with attention being paid to the longer-term and multiple legacies of events. Jones (2001) points out that there is little consensus on how the impacts of sport events can assist with broader based development. While several studies have focused on the legacy impacts of mega-events, Chappelet and Junod (2006) and Preuss (2007) say there is no clear definition of the term ‘legacy’, and Preuss (2007) says the confusion about the concept of legacy and the elements that form part of a legacy make it difficult to measure the legacy of mega-events accurately. The term ‘legacy’ has generally encapsulated all that is positive about sport events and their ability to create positive change for individuals, communities and stakeholders (Roberts, 2007). However, Preuss (2007) observes that not all legacies are positive, nor can they always be planned. The economic benefits in particular are often inflated, while costs are underplayed and justified on the grounds of widespread benefits, which do not often directly benefit the majority of the populace. Cornelissen (2009) adds that the social and environmental consequences of mega-events have also been mixed. Nash and Johnstone (2001) argue that the hosting of such events constricts communities' access to facilities, and Waitt (2003) argues that they have a negative impact on the marginalised.

Given the lack of a clear definition of ‘legacy’, Preuss proposes the following: ‘irrespective of the time of production and space, legacy is all planned and unplanned, positive and negative, tangible and intangible structures created for and by a sport event that remain longer than the event itself’ (2007:210). Chappelet and Junod identify various types of legacies associated with mega-events: sporting (newly built or renovated sporting facilities that serve some purpose after the event), urban (buildings that serve no sporting function but have an impact on the urban structure of the host destination), infrastructural (networks such as transport and telecommunications that are built or upgraded as a result of the event), economic (tourist spend and investment, including job creation) and social (perceptions, attitudes, memories and experiences of host residents) (2006:84). Preuss (2007) adds that sport development legacy mostly refers to sport infrastructure, increased sport participation, development of sport clubs and leagues, and sport sponsorship. Other social benefits typically include a general feeling of optimism (the feel-good effect) and the creation of a combined national vision (nation building) (Preuss, 2007; Allmers & Maennig, 2008). Nation building emerged as a key social development legacy of the 2010 FIFA World Cup in South Africa, but whether it will be long-term is questionable. Labuschagne (2008:13) contends that sport has the capacity to unify people, however temporarily, and more effort and careful planning is required to ensure that the benefits are felt more widely.

Cornelissen (2009) observes that while an emergent discourse on maximising the positive legacies of mega-events has encouraged a more integrative approach to assessing impacts, the ‘hard’ legacies (i.e. the development of infrastructure) still receive greater attention than the ‘soft’ (i.e. the social effects). She adds that the current political economy of major events has not sufficiently stimulated structures for international development exchange, despite some initiatives introduced by international sport federations that could be considered ‘sport in development’. A case in point is the 2010 FIFA World Cup, as discussed further below.

2.2 The 2010 FIFA World Cup and development

The 2010 FIFA World Cup was used by the South African Government to achieve regional growth and help revive the African continent (Cornelissen, 2004). The African Legacy Programme launched by the African Union and the Organising Committee included the use of football for socioeconomic redress (GCIS, 2010). ‘Win in Africa with Africa’ and ‘20 Centres for 2010′ were the official FIFA legacy programmes in Africa (FIFA, 2009b). The aim of ‘Win in Africa with Africa’ is to provide artificial football turfs to develop the sport in poor communities. By developing and promoting sport, it aims to educate communities about physical and mental health and to tackle both communicable and non-communicable diseases that are widespread in these communities (FIFA, 2009a). The ‘20 Centres for 2010’ campaign's aim is to achieve positive social change through football by building 20 Football for Hope Centres for public health, education and football across Africa. These centres aim to address local social challenges in disadvantaged areas and improve education and health services for young people. FIFA (2009b) contends that ‘20 Centres for 2010’ will promote social development through football beyond the World Cup, leaving a tangible social legacy for Africa.

It is important to note that the 2010 FIFA World Cup also kick-started other non-FIFA football development initiatives such as that described in the case study in this paper.

3. Background to the case study

The background to this case study is primarily drawn from the Foundation itself. Initially known as the Spaces for Sport project, the FFSA was established in 2008 in response to the looming 2010 FIFA World Cup and the lack of sporting facilities available in Gansbaai. It aimed to capitalise on the increased excitement generated by the hosting of the mega-event in South Africa and to leave a lasting football and social legacy in a region that might not otherwise directly benefit. The FFSA can be considered a sport-plus non-governmental organisation that focuses primarily on sport development but also emphasises wider social benefits (Levermore, 2008a). It may also be seen as a hybrid of Coalter's (2009) ‘sport plus’ and ‘plus sport’ as mentioned above, or as a hybrid of bottom-up and top-down approaches, in that it was initiated by a local leader with the support of donor agencies and the local municipality.

The small town of Gansbaai lies 250 km from Cape Town on the southern Indian Ocean coast, in the Cape Overberg region of the Western Cape. The fishing industry is still the economic heartbeat of the town, while the tourism industry is growing due to the attractions of the southern right whales and great white sharks off its coast (CTRU, 2009).

It was the Foundation's aim to build a multipurpose facility that would serve as a community development project (Grootbos Foundation, 2009). This aim was realised when the Gansbaai Communal Sport Centre was officially opened on 20 April 2008. The project was made possible through collaboration between the Grootbos Foundation, ABSA and Barclays banks, the Overstrand Municipality, the Barclays Premier League and the Western Cape Department of Cultural Affairs and Sport (Grootbos Foundation, 2009). The project would not have developed to the same extent had it not been for the World Cup. Increasing popular pressure on international sport federations and their commercial partners to demonstrate greater levels of accountability has obliged them to take the issue of the broader developmental significance of their events more seriously (Cornelissen, 2009). The FFSA is not a FIFA legacy programme but is supported by the above commercial sponsors of football in South Africa, who were also leveraging their association with football (and the World Cup). Levermore (2010) observes that corporate social responsibility in sport has allowed development initiatives to reach communities to which traditional community schemes, particularly those for youth communities, would not have extended.

The sport facility is strategically placed in the centre of three separate communities, Masakhane Township, with about 12 000 black residents, Blompark, with about 5000 coloured residents, and Gansbaai, with about 8000 white residents, which together make up Gansbaai. These communities are split along racial lines, reflecting their history as three separate communities as designated by the apartheid era Group Areas Act that segregated residential neighbourhoods. Prior to the establishment of the FFSA, there was woeful under-investment in sports facilities in the Gansbaai region. The FFSA were determined to rebuild the region's dilapidated community sports facilities in order to reverse the growing trend among young people to be uninterested in sport, and football in particular (Grootbos Foundation, 2009). The FFSA believes that by developing these facilities and thus creating opportunities for young people to participate in sport, receive professional coaching and learn about the environment, its vision of improved social integration and development of the community will be realised. FFSA founder Michael Lutzeyer claims that sport is a wonderfully simple way to break down social barriers and bring people together on equal terms (personal communication, 17 December 2009). For the youth of these townships, it also provides a healthy focus and inspires pride and the determination to succeed (Grootbos Foundation, 2009). The FFSA's vision is to use sport to accelerate social change by integrating and uplifting the community and developing the youth (Grootbos Foundation, 2009).

The FFSA Gansbaai project appears to be a good example of an event-themed regeneration project. It will leave a legacy consisting of facilities such as a ‘third generation’ football pitch, rugby and cricket fields, netball and tennis courts, a mobile gym, and a clubhouse with changing and shower facilities (Grootbos Foundation, 2009). Previously there were no sporting facilities in Masakhane, only a few in Blompark, and in Gansbaai 18 senior soccer clubs all shared one pitch (Grootbos Foundation, 2009). The sport centre gives more than 20 000 people an opportunity to play sport and currently runs a football training programme for between 70 and 150 youth (male and female) consisting of two-hour sessions on four afternoons a week (Grootbos Foundation, 2009). The FFSA also runs holiday programmes, hosts junior tournaments and events linked to awareness campaigns, and organises matches for the teams on weekends. It has also begun to expand to other sports besides football.

The FFSA has invested in social development as well as sport. A tangible aspect of this is an educational project, linked to the football project, which takes a holistic approach, giving the youth lessons in preserving the environment, HIV/AIDS awareness and nutrition, and improving their command of English (Grootbos Foundation, 2009). This is in line with the project's focus areas: health and well-being, education and life skills. Peer group leadership is also developed by giving local youth an opportunity to coach teams, referee games and assist with coaching clinics (Grootbos Foundation, 2009). Tournaments have taken place with teams from neighbouring communities and schools and the Gansbaai participants boast that they set an example as being the only mixed-race team at these events (Grootbos Foundation, 2009). The youth also engage in other activities that they might not otherwise have been exposed to, such as educational excursions to tourist attractions in the region.

These tangible development and legacy aspects can be documented, but it is more difficult to measure the ‘soft’ social development legacies that result from sport development projects like the Gansbaai project. The next section explains how we attempted to measure and analyse these.

4. Methodology

This study involved primary research using questionnaire surveys, a method chosen to ensure that views were systematically collected from the three communities in Gansbaai. We asked the respondents closed-ended questions to discover what they knew about the FFSA and what they thought of the FFSA and the 2010 FIFA World Cup. We included some Likert scale questions to discover what they thought about the FFSA's community level impacts.

To overcome the limitations of this structured survey, we also asked open-ended questions to investigate their opinions of the sustainability of the FFSA and their community needs. To do this we conducted 203 face-to-face interviews in homes in the local communities of Gansbaai, using a systematic, spatially based convenience sampling method: 81 in Masakhane, 67 in Blompark and 55 in Gansbaai, reflecting the population size of each group. In each community we purposefully chose as the first household the one that was closest to the FFSA facilities. After that we interviewed an adult (over the age of 18) in every 10th household until we had the required sample size.

We collected the data over a week during September 2010, three months after the World Cup. The responses to the closed-ended and Likert scale questions were analysed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) to generate frequency tables. The responses to the open-ended questions were analysed using the constant comparative method to identify common aspects and issues and group them thematically.

5. Findings and discussion

5.1 Demographic profile

Most of the respondents were male (65%) and the average age was 34.8 years. In terms of the historical racial categories, the largest group was African (40%), followed by coloured (33%) and white (27%). A quarter of the respondents were unemployed, 12% were unskilled labourers and 12% were students – a profile typical of lower income households in these communities, and concentrated in the African and coloured communities. Similarly, only about half of the respondents (49%) from these communities had completed secondary education, with a further 15% having completed only primary education, 5% having partly completed it, and 5% having had no education at all. The demographic profile revealed a socially differentiated community typical of South Africa, confirming that the FFSA's key objective of promoting community integration and breaking down social barriers is relevant in Gansbaai.

5.2 Legacy of the World Cup

Most of the respondents (89%) felt that the 2010 World Cup had left positive legacies, although most (74%) also believed that their households had not benefited directly. Opinions as to whether the community had benefited were almost equally divided: 47% thought it had (mentioning improved sport facilities, bringing the community together, and infrastructural and sport development), and 53% thought it had not (saying that only a select few had gained opportunities, and that there had been no community involvement, and no job creation). The positive responses seem to counter Pillay and Bass's argument (2008) that there is little evidence to support the notion that the impacts of the 2010 FIFA World Cup will flow beyond the host cities themselves, though they suggest that the benefits are unequally distributed.

We would argue that the Cup has had positive and negative legacies which are not necessarily in opposition to each other. In terms of social impacts, overall, positive legacies were left and our respondents' responses echoed general feelings in South Africa about the World Cup, although the majority had not benefited directly. (Direct benefits could be, for example, participating personally in the event by watching a match live in a stadium, or receiving economic benefits.) The responses to our survey are not surprising, given that there is significant evidence that residents are unlikely to experience tangible direct benefits from a country hosting a mega-event; however, the emotional or feel-good experience is an important aspect to consider. It is this that creates an important social legacy by enhancing national and community pride. Green and Chalip (1998) suggest that celebration and camaraderie translate into a sense of belonging that has social significance beyond the event. South African experience also shows that sport events play a major role in this regard (Steenveld & Strelitz, 1998; Bob & Swart, 2010). Furthermore, it is clear that the larger the event the more widespread and greater the impact. This was certainly the case during the 2010 FIFA World Cup – no other event in South Africa has triggered such significant investments in development and the sport of football.

5.2.1 Sport legacy of the World Cup

Most of our respondents concurred with statements presented to them in the questionnaire survey that a mega-event can contribute to achieving a sport legacy. Their responses to descriptions of types of impacts revealed that they thought generally positive effects had been realised. The majority (75%) agreed that the event promoted the development and maintenance of infrastructure, including sport facilities. Similarly, 80% felt that it would leave behind physical legacies in the form of infrastructure such as stadiums for the use of local communities. These findings are interesting given that it is unlikely that the hosting of the FIFA World Cup would have been associated with infrastructural development in a small town without the FFSA's efforts, since almost all infrastructural developments were concentrated in the nine host cities. The lack of school and community sport facilities restricts sport participation (Burnett, 2010) and this case study shows how the FFSA interventions helped develop sport facilities and concomitant participation in Gansbaai. It can therefore be argued that the communal sport facility in Gansbaai can be considered a tangible legacy of the 2010 event in a non-host area.

Participation in sport is considered part of the sport legacy. More than two thirds of the respondents affirmed that the World Cup boosted participation in sport, particularly soccer in the community. To support their view they identified several projects in the area and evidence of increased interest in soccer in the communities, especially among the youth. We therefore argue that the World Cup served as a catalyst for the FFSA project, which contributed to the improvement of the game in the host country as it provided for football coaching and participation among the youth in Gansbaai. Moreover, it seems like a positive way to reverse the growing tendency of the youth, as identified by the FFSA, to stop playing sport and football in particular (Grootbos Foundation, 2009). Chronic poverty in South Africa manifests as low literacy levels, high incidences of violence, teenage pregnancies, gang formation and other social ills, and the lack of resources fosters ‘a mutual dependency and culture of interdependency’ and extreme poverty ‘undermin[es] the social fabric’ (Burnett, 2010:5). Participation in sport may not necessarily be inherently good, but it could enhance awareness of a healthy, active lifestyle and thus aid community development and help to address social development challenges currently experienced, especially among the youth.

There was generally high awareness of Grootbos community-related projects (74%) and specifically the FFSA, with 64% of respondents stating that they were aware of the project, as shown in Table 1. Respondents were also able to identify some of the key funders, including ABSA Bank, the municipality, Grootbos and overseas investors. Awareness of the FFSA project was significantly higher than for any of the other community-related projects and on a par with Green Futures, an established environmental project. It is also important to note that community members, when asked what other projects Grootbos should be involved in, mentioned sport development (50%) third highest after educational training (65%) and income generating projects (56%). Clearly, the responses indicate that job creation and skills development (to enhance employability) remain the main concerns in Grootbos. Unsurprisingly, it was respondents from the African and coloured communities in particular, where poverty is more widely experienced, who expressed this opinion. However, the results seem to indicate that the Gansbaai community recognises the importance of sport itself.

Table 1: Awareness of Grootbos community-related projects (n = 203, in %)

	Yes	No	Who funds/supports project?
Green Futures	65.5	34.5	Agri-SETA, Eden project, Grootbos, don't know
FFSA (Gansbaai Communal Sports Centre)	64	36	ABSA, Municipality, Grootbos, overseas investors, lottery, don't know
Penguin Project (Faces of Need)	18.7	81.3	Dyer Island Conservation/ Cruises, Grootbos, Marine Dynamics, Municipality, White Sharks project, don't know
Nolwandle Craft Project	36	64	Grootbos, guests, White Sharks project, don't know
Flower Valley Conservation Trust	40.9	59.1	Fynsa, Grootbos, don't know
Siyakula Project (landscaping at Masakhane Crèche & Primary School)	37.9	62.1	Grootbos, don't know
Other (Chef school, Eden Project UK, Growing the Future, Shark Boat)	3.9	96.1	Eden project UK, Grootbos

5.2.2 Social legacy of the World Cup

The sport legacy is closely associated with social development. Specifically, participation in sport promotes a healthy lifestyle, including positive social interactions, and is an effective way to link social awareness and self-esteem building programmes. Changes in perceptions of local residents of the host city or region, and particularly social cohesion and nation-building, are regarded as key social legacies. The overwhelming majority of respondents said the 2010 event had created national pride and nation-building and made local people feel good about themselves and their community (87% each). These results support the premise that nation-building is a key social development legacy of the 2010 World Cup. Burnett (2010) notes that the ‘feel-good’ factor and celebratory nature of sport events can foster social value through a sense of community. Preuss (2007) argues that an essential part of the social legacy of mega-events is the change in local residents' perceptions of the host city or region, with social cohesion and nation-building being key social legacies, and this change in perceptions was discernible among our non-host region respondents as well.

About a third of the respondents (33.5%) said that a family member participates in the FFSA project. This indicated that while many households do not directly participate in the project, most were aware of its existence, which shows that the FFSA has a significant presence in the community. The FFSA seems to have achieved moderate levels of social integration with respect to gender and race. Just over half of the respondents (57%) said that both males and females participate, however 40% said male only. Similarly, 43% of the respondents said that all races participate equally, whereas 38% said the participants were African, 14% said coloured and 3% said white. Upon further examination, however, there seemed to be strong agreement that the FFSA promotes social integration among the different groups in the community, with 83% agreeing or strongly agreeing with this statement (see Table 2). The researchers' observations during field visits as well as conversations with Lutzeyer revealed that the FFSA founders and staff make a concerted effort to ensure that improved race relations are fostered among the different groups in the community. The responses showed that this appears to be working and that the FFSA's efforts are influencing social interactions through sport and related projects in the community. The results seem to support Levermore's assertion (2008b) that sport as an engine for development may be used in building social cohesion in societies dealing with exclusion based on race, gender, youth and poverty. Participation in sport and the creation of a safe and neutral space (the sport facility deliberately located in the centre of the three communities) also seem to have been effective in providing a location for positive social engagement that breaks down historical barriers. This was not confined to sport but also involved the other social development programmes discussed in Section 3. This was a deliberate objective identified by the FFSA and integrated into all its activities.

Table 2: Level of agreement with statements about the FFSA project (n = 203, in %)

Statement	1	2	3	4	5
FFSA promotes social integration among the different groups in the community	40.9	42.4	7.9	4.4	4.4
FFSA enhances community development	34	47.3	15.8	1.5	1.5
FFSA has had a significant impact on youth development in the community	36.9	47.8	12.3	1.5	1.5
FFSA has increased environmental awareness in the community	19.7	38.9	26.6	10.8	3.9
FFSA provides educational and life-skill enhancement for the youth in areas such as HIV/AIDS and leadership training	21.7	41.9	27.1	6.9	2.5
FFSA promotes improved health and well-being	33	43.8	18.7	3.4	1
FFSA enhances confidence and self-esteem among the youth	36.5	49.8	10.8	1	2
FFSA reduces crime, vandalism and delinquency in the community	29.6	37.4	18.2	5.4	9.4
Note: 1 = strongly agree, 2 = agree, 3 = neutral, 4 = disagree, 5 = strongly disagree.

Respondents strongly agreed with many of the statements reflecting the FFSA's vision (see Table 2), with the most positive being the project's impact on youth development (95%), confidence and self-esteem among the youth (86%), community pride (82%) and community development (81%). The FFSA was also seen as a valuable asset to the community (89%). As mentioned above, SRSA (2009) claims that youth involvement in sport is vital to building communities and the FFSA project certainly seems to be delivering on this objective. Burnett (2008:10) says that while ‘the unit of analysis is generally centred around the collective effect … psychological factors such as improved self-image, self-efficacy and mood changes are inherent in the cathartic value of being part of an event’. She adds that the ‘feel-good effect inexorably relates to the self, others and the environment and regularly creates an enduring disposition and memories of personal experiences which are internalised by individuals according to a personal orientation’ (Burnett, 2008:10). The responses to our survey suggest that the Gansbaai sport facility and the activities associated with it and with the FFSA are delivering social benefits in the community.

Responses to the following statements about the FFSA were still positive, though reflecting less agreement: the FFSA promotes improved health and well-being (77%), the FFSA reduces crime, vandalism and delinquency in the community (67%) and the FFSA provides educational and life skills enhancements for youth in areas such as HIV/AIDS and leadership training (59%). The FFSA needs to focus on these particular issues in future, and to ensure that the community is aware of their efforts.

The respondents also provided suggestions for improving the FFSA project, such as ensuring that the project continues in the long term, improving marketing and increasing awareness, upgrading facilities (building a stadium), employing local people and targeting all communities. These suggestions revealed that there is a community need to address the issues beyond sport that the FFSA has integrated into its projects but could strengthen.

6. Conclusion

The authors acknowledge that mega-events are not a panacea for curing the developmental ills faced by host destinations. However, our case study of the Gansbaai project does suggest the role that sport mega-events such as the FIFA World Cup can play as a catalyst for sport development initiatives. It also exemplifies a sport-plus approach to development and, more importantly, it was a non-FIFA-related legacy project which allowed a development initiative to reach communities to which FIFA-related legacy programmes did not extend. Moreover, the project would not have developed to the same extent had it not been for the World Cup, as it allowed corporates to leverage their association with football and galvanise the various partners into action.

The positive results that the FFSA has achieved with respect to sport and social programmes provide evidence that legacies can be developed beyond the host cities. In terms of the sporting legacy, the 2010 FIFA World Cup and the FFSA in particular contributed to the development of sport infrastructure and participation. From a social legacy perspective, it appears to have successfully achieved less tangible, ‘softer’ legacies such as encouraging youth development, community development and integration, and community pride.

The FFSA has also built a solid foundation in the Gansbaai community as it is recognised as a valuable asset. The authors recommend that the FFSA build on this strong base by creating awareness of social development aspects of the project that go beyond sport, for example, issues related to negative social behaviour such as crime and delinquency, and educational and life skills enhancements with respect to HIV/AIDS and leadership training. Finally, we recommend ongoing monitoring and evaluation of the FFSA project, along with community engagement and involvement, in order to keep improving and refining the project.

Our study provides baseline information on the FFSA that can be used to assess long-term impacts. It should be noted that the FFSA was initiated in relation to the intensive publicity associated with the FIFA World Cup and the sponsorship interest generated. While it could be argued that its positive impacts have been small, and the project may not have had very wide coverage, one cannot ignore the fact that the FFSA is a proactive initiative, locally kick-started and a non-FIFA legacy programme. Since it is embedded in the community and generally viewed positively by the community, perhaps because it is new and backed by significant investments, it may stand a good chance of being sustained. It remains to be seen whether it will prosper or, as has happened with many developmental projects on the African continent, the facility will become a ‘white elephant’. It is imperative that further research be undertaken in Gansbaai to assess project sustainability and changing community attitudes.