The Public Management of Sport

Abstract

This article proposes that sport policy problems exhibit the characteristics of ‘wicked problems’, in that they are difficult to define/interpret, are based in competing/uncertain causes, and generate further issues when solutions are applied. Drawing from the existing body of empirical work in Australia, Canada, the UK and New Zealand, it is further suggested that the modernization of government's partner national sport organizations (NSOs) is effectively wicked because it results in their commercialization and introduces challenges, dilemmas and tradeoffs. Possible consequences for central government agencies include a further emphasis towards elite sport, and a challenge of ensuring the responsiveness of NSOs in relation to diversity issues and their traditional representative functions. The author speculates on the paradox in the government expectation that commercialized NSOs can be repositories of ‘social capital’.

Key words:

• Sport policy
• wicked problems
• modernization
• paradox
• government

Notes

1 Sport is now an established feature in the governments of most economically developed nations. Houlihan (2005) for example observes that twenty-six out of the thirty-nine members of the Council of Europe had a clearly identifiable responsibility for sport, fifteen of which had a minister and department.

2 Instruments include regulation (e.g. drug testing), exhortation (e.g. physical activity promotional campaigns), taxation (e.g. tax credits for youth participation), grants and direct provision. Institutional arrangements vary but include a combination of Departments/Ministries, inter-sectoral collaborations, partnerships and contract agreements with non-profit organizations.

3 SPARC's total budget increased from $35.6 million in 2001/2 to $108 million for 2007/8.

4 The Labour Government did financially compensate NZ Cricket when it prevented Zimbabwe athletes from obtaining visas to tour New Zealand in 2006 (Cullen 2006).

5 Concerns for advocacy seem particularly evident in Canada. For example, the Advisory Committee to the Secretary of Sport recommended the creation of a ‘single, inclusive and democratically structured organization … to represent certified coaches in Canada’ (Advisory Committee on the Canadian Sport Policy 2001).