From Olympic administration to Olympic governance

Chappelet, Jean-Loup

doi:10.1080/17430437.2015.1108648

Cited by 46 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…É importante ressaltar que, no Sistema Olímpico atual, o COI está longe de ser a única organização que influencia nas decisões acerca do Movimento Olímpico. Os patrocinadores e a mídia possuem voz ativa e precisam ser levados em conta nessa complexa teia de relações (Chappelet, 2015). Assim, Parry (2018) levanta a hipótese da pressão de patrocinadores, como a Alibaba (especializada em comércio online), que fechou uma parceria histórica com o COI em 2017 (IOC, 2017a), pela busca em elevar o status dos e-Sports para esporte através da inclusão nos Jogos Olímpicos e, dessa forma, maximizar suas receitas através do mercado esportivo.…”

Section: A Inclusão De Seis Jogos Eletrônicos (Arena Of Valor Clash unclassified

The eSports and Olympic Games: Perspectives of an ongoing debate

Todt¹,

Pase²,

Scarton³

et al. 2020

Journal of Human Sport and Exercise - 2020 - Rio 2016 Olympic Games Third Anniversary Special Edition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This literature review paper aims to understand the different perspectives on the inclusion or not of eSports in the Olympic Games programme. ESports (electronic sports) popularity among world's youth population grows daily. The eSports phenomenon became a new form of entertainment with its own financial means and cultural practices, very close related to streaming technology, and ultimately bringing new questions and challenges for the so-called 'traditional sports' field. The audience success sparked the gaming industry with a considerable economic growth, transforming a backyard practice in the beginning of the century into a worldwide recognized activity; a megaevent in terms of infrastructure and media coverage. Therefore, in a short period of time the debate about eSports become recognized as 'sport' as well as to be include into the Olympic Games programme emerged. In recent years, some decisions heated this debate. For example, at the occasion of the 6th Summit of the International Olympic Committee (IOC), held at Lausanne (Switzerland) in 2017, eSports were placed on the agenda about the future of the Olympic Movement. As a result of the Summit discussions, the IOC concluded that (1) eSports have been demonstrating a sharp growth with the youth of several countries and could become a platform for engagement between this young population and the Olympic Movement; (2) eSports can be considered a physical activity and the players training intensity could be compared to 'traditional sports' athletes; (3) to be recognized as sport by the IOC, the contents of eSports must not violate the Olympic Values; and (4) in order to the IOC grant recognition, an international

show abstract

Section: A Inclusão De Seis Jogos Eletrônicos (Arena Of Valor Clash unclassified

The eSports and Olympic Games: Perspectives of an ongoing debate

Todt¹,

Pase²,

Scarton³

et al. 2020

Journal of Human Sport and Exercise - 2020 - Rio 2016 Olympic Games Third Anniversary Special Edition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, Chappelet [42] mentioned existing heritage sports events (HSE)-which can be defined as events generally involving a single sport-that have been held in the same place for many years and have been hosted regularly since their foundation-usually each year, sometimes biannually, without interruptions other than under exceptional circumstances. Furthermore, those events have to be recognized as institutions [43]. If we consider the notion of heritage events, the concept of a "place of memory" [44] could be attributed to the OG, referring to the OG's tradition as a one-off event-and as a heritage event-, because it strongly links the event to the place in which it is held.…”

Section: (Heritage) Sports Eventsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does the Olympic Agenda 2020 Have the Power to Create a New Olympic Heritage? An Analysis for the 2026 Winter Olympic Games Bid

Schnitzer

Haizinger

2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) lacks candidates willing to host the Olympic Games (OG) and has reacted to this situation by introducing the Olympic Agenda 2020 (OA)—a reform process making the OG more attractive for potential hosts. This study analyzes whether the OA plays a crucial role for the future of the OG. We, therefore, examined the official IOC documents and feasibility studies of the 2026 Winter Olympic Games (WOG) bidders and conducted qualitative interviews with experts in the field (n = 15). The results reveal that the 2026 WOG hosts plan to reduce the budgets for the organization and the infrastructure costs in the host regions. As a consequence, the number and nature of the sites and venues as well as the distances between them will increase. This means that the future Olympic heritage (OH) may lay less in iconic buildings but rather focus on the attempt to fulfil the city’s long-term strategies. Our analyses extend the literature by: (1) analysing the OA in view of future OG, (2) comparing experiences from past OG with those of current bidders, (3) integrating expert knowledge thanks to qualitative interviews and, finally, (4) considering new heritage concepts.

show abstract

“…Previous studies have examined the nature and extent of changing governance arrangements within international sport (e.g. Chappelet 2016, Geeraert et al 2013, Jedlicka, 2018. Geeraert et al (2013), for example, highlighted the implications of network governance arrangements on the autonomy of international governing bodies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An analysis of governance failure and power dynamics in international sport: the Russian doping scandal

Harris¹,

Dowling

Houlihan

2021

International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International sport is inherently political. Its governance structures are complex involving a multiplicity of actors. Its foundation is traditional, centred on ideas about self-governance and autonomy while simultaneously challenged by the contradictory requirements to promote and regulate sport. The politics of international sport can be seen in the authoritative allocation of values, the collective action necessary to determine who gets what, when and how, and ultimately being clear about who cares about what, where and why. It is in this setting where the concept of power and the ability of agents to exercise power is particularly insightful in garnering a more nuanced understanding of the systemic governance of international sport. To this end, this study examines power relations in international sport by applying Bergsgard's analytical framework, which adapts Lukes' three faces of power and Bourdieu's ideas about symbolic power, to the Russian Doping Scandal. Documentary analysis is used as the primary method of exploration. Our analysis illustrates how the deep structures of the Russian state and the structural conditions of the international sport governance field permitted the case to evolve to scandalous proportions. The paper also reveals the power dynamics between various stakeholders involved in the scandal and how these power dynamics led to failings in the governance of international sport.

show abstract

From Olympic administration to Olympic governance

Cited by 46 publications

References 6 publications

The eSports and Olympic Games: Perspectives of an ongoing debate

The eSports and Olympic Games: Perspectives of an ongoing debate

Does the Olympic Agenda 2020 Have the Power to Create a New Olympic Heritage? An Analysis for the 2026 Winter Olympic Games Bid

An analysis of governance failure and power dynamics in international sport: the Russian doping scandal

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About