This article explores the almost evangelical policy rhetoric of the sports-for-development ‘movement’ and the wide diversity of programmes and organizations included under this vague and weakly theorized banner. It is suggested that, although the rhetoric of sport as a human right has provided some rhetorical and symbolic legitimation for sport-for-development initiatives, the recent dramatic increase in interest reflects broader changes in the aid paradigm, reflecting perceived failures of top-down economic aid and an increased concern with issues of human and social capital, as well as the strengthening of civil society organizations. In this context the presumed ability of sport to offer an economy of solutions to a wide range of development problems led the United Nations, with the encouragement of a vociferous sport-for-development lobby, to turn to the world of sport in an effort to achieve its Millennium Development Goals. While there is a certain theoretical logic to some of the policy assertions about the contribution of sport to aspects of development, it is argued that the new approaches contain a number of dangers: confusing potential micro-level individual outcomes with community and broader macro-level impacts; ignoring wider socio-political contexts within which sport-for-development organizations have to operate; seeking to solve broad gauge problems via limited focus interventions; and encouraging mission drift by sport-for-development organizations wholly dependent on aid from a variety of aid agencies, with often overly ambitious non-sporting agendas. It is argued that if sport-for-development is to make a contribution to wider processes of development there is a need to ‘de-reify’ the rhetoric of sport-for-development and its implicit view of sport, and to view research and evaluation in terms of local programme development rather than the legitimation of international organizations and lobbies.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

This article reports on research on the effectiveness of sports-based interventions that sought to address issues of gang membership, racism, at-risk youth and a rather ill-defined notion of ‘conflict’. The article illustrates the varying centrality of sport in such programmes, reports on a series of in-depth interviews with participants in four programmes, exploring the nature of their experiences and perceptions of the programme elements that had the greatest impact on their values, attitudes and behaviour. The analysis draws on a number of programme theories about how such programmes might work and emphasises the centrality of social relationships between leaders and participants and the development of respect, trust and reciprocity as a basis for potential attitude and behaviour change. The interview data and previous research are used to develop an indicative programme theory which illustrates that, where change occurs, it is most likely to occur via systems of social relationships most characteristic of sport-plus programmes.