Is hosting the Games enough to make a nation more athletic?
On Monday, October 21, Paris unveiled the logo for the 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games, featuring the face of a woman to symbolize games that are "more open, more participatory, and more inclusive," according to the Paris 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games Organizing Committee (Cojop).
Simon Gérard, Coventry University; Andrew Jones, Coventry University; Ian Stuart Brittain, Coventry University and Sylvain Ferez, University of Montpellier
Paris 2024
Behind this ambition lies the hope of increasing participation in sports, particularly among young people and underrepresented groups. This argument is often used to justify the organization of major sporting events. When London hosted the Olympic and Paralympic Games in 2012, the government wanted to "inspire a generation."
But is it that simple? Does hosting the Games automatically lead to an increase in participation in sports within the host nation? In recent years, several studies have shown that the goal set by the British government has not been achieved.
Sports participation has not increased significantly or sustainably in the country since 2012.
How can this observation be explained? To answer this question, we looked at the effect of the fiscal austerity policy implemented by the British government in the late 2000s. To what extent did this policy influence the legacy of the London 2012 Games in terms of sports participation, particularly with regard to its impact on English amateur sports clubs?
The impact of austerity measures on English sports
The impact of austerity measures on sports participation in the United Kingdom has recently been the subject of several academic and journalistic studies. Researchers have shown that the growing structural inequalities generated by these measures have had a negative effect on participation in sport, affecting people living in poverty more severely; the phenomenon is exacerbated by factors such as gender, disability, age, and ethnicity.
For example, young people from low-income families (less than £16,000 per year, or €18,600) are half as likely to be members of a club, compete, or be coaches. Their chances of volunteering are 25% lower.
Another study revealed that programs dedicated to increasing participation in sports were being weakened, while those aimed at broadening participation among various underrepresented groups (such as women, young people, and people with disabilities) were on the verge of disappearing.
A recent study notes a shift in sports provision from the public and voluntary sectors to the private and commercial sectors.
Drawing on this research, our study seeks to understand the mechanisms by which austerity policies have impacted amateur sports clubs, thereby affecting the achievement of the goals of increasing sports participation expected from the organization of the London 2012 Games. To this end, a series of interviews was conducted with leaders of amateur sports clubs in central England. We also studied the evolution of the main sports policies and strategies implemented by successive governments in the United Kingdom.
A changing socioeconomic environment
In 2003, when the British government decided to support London's bid to host the 2012 Games, the United Kingdom was enjoying a long period of economic stability. In addition, the Labour government in power was investing heavily in the public sector, particularly in various programs to promote participation in sports. The financial crisis of 2007-2008 changed the situation. It led to a significant increase in the public deficit, which reached £156 billion (€181,365) in 2009.
The following year, the election of a coalition formed by the Conservatives and Social Democrats marked a turning point not only ideologically in terms of the role of the state, but also politically, with a series of budgetary austerity measures and cuts in public investment.
Local government budgets have been slashed, leading to a reduction in the range of sports activities offered or supported by public services. The Local Government Association estimates that local governments spent £1 billion (€1.1 billion) on sport in 2014, compared with £1.4 billion (€1.6 billion) in 2009-2010. Another study reports that the number of sports facilities (swimming pools, athletics tracks, tennis courts, etc.) fell from 80,942 in 2012 to 78,270 in 2016, a phenomenon associated with job losses and a reduction in opening hours or the range of sports on offer. These budget cuts have had repercussions for amateur sports clubs, as one of the leaders interviewed points out:
"I know from experience that things are rather difficult for local authorities at the moment, and this complicates matters for us too, as we depend on them for access to the [municipal] swimming pool."
Several flagship programs were also canceled by the Conservative government, such as the "free swimming" program designed to encourage swimming among those under 16 and over 60.
Hugh Robertson, then Minister for Sport and the Olympics, suddenly described the program as "a luxury we can no longer afford." This change in policy also affected sports clubs, as the manager of a swimming club mentioned:
"It was great when the Labor government guaranteed free swimming, but when that was scrapped, there's no doubt it had a big impact on us."
Paradoxes at the heart of the legacy of the London 2012 Games
More broadly, our findings indicate profound contradictions between austerity policies and the goals of promoting sports participation promoted by the London 2012 Games.
At the very moment when the budget for the Games was revised to £9 billion (€10.4 billion), with the government refusing to allow "Austerity Games, " the funds allocated to local sports clubs and programs promoting participation in sports were significantly reduced.
This contradiction at the heart of the legacy of London 2012 is highlighted by all of the sports leaders interviewed. The president of a swimming club points out:
"I've been involved in [local community sports] for over 20 years, and the situation is worse than it's ever been."
Another executive does not hesitate to add:
"We're losing our swimming pool, and they're talking to us about Olympic legacy! Is that what Olympic legacy means? Our situation is much worse than it was in 2012! So I don't think there has been any legacy..."
At least two conclusions are clear. Even though the British government has announced the end of austerity measures, their consequences will not disappear overnight.
British sports clubs need a stable economic and political environment that is conducive to their activities and that encourages not only increased participation in sports but also its expansion to segments of the population that have hitherto been sedentary.
Finally, hosting major sporting events cannot contribute to the growth of sports participation without the support of clear and sustainable policies to support local sports movements. The Paris 2024 Games Organizing Committee has been warned!
Simon Gérard, Lecturer in Sport Management, Coventry University; Andrew Jones, Research Assistant, Coventry University; Ian Stuart Brittain, Research Fellow, Centre for Business in Society, Coventry University and Sylvain Ferez, Senior Lecturer, Sociology, University of Montpellier
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Readthe original article.