Search

The global expansion of sports betting has resulted in the formation of (inter)national governing regimes aimed at sustaining revenue and regulating attendant issues, including match-fixing. This article explores the workings of these regimes vis-à-vis the management of match-fixing issues in sport. More particularly, this article focuses on betting monitoring programmes as countermeasures against match-fixing and conceptualises these as social instruments that ultimately define issues and influence the wider integrity agenda of anti-match-fixing campaigns. Analysing documentary, observation and interview data from two disparate monitoring programmes, the results show that betting monitoring is a technical extension of corporate risk management, invariably reflecting the business interests of the betting industry. Therefore, the operating logic of betting monitoring defines match-fixing as an act of sabotaging the competitive edge of betting companies. Moreover, this interest-laden paradigm reigns within the broader policy agenda of sport integrity by equating the betting industry's interest with that of sport. From this, the article suggests that betting monitoring plays a part in the legitimation of commercial gambling by reframing the issue of match-fixing as a common enemy that gambling and sport join forces to combat, not a risk that gambling brings to sport. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The concern for athlete maltreatment in elite sport emerged in response to a wide range of high-profile cases. While diverse theories and concepts have been used to explore the subject, there is a need for non-Western analyses that can attend to the cultures, practices and narratives of Asian states. Drawing on the case of South Korea's elite sport system, this paper scrutinises the mix of institutional practices and narratives that may variously converge to enable maltreatment or diverge, to prompt calls for systemic change. Grounded in ‘new institutionalism’ and a qualitative approach that incorporates document analysis and semi-structured interviews, this research examines maltreatment within a unique Korean Confucian hierarchical socio-cultural context. The results indicate that complementary practices and narratives enable maltreatment and facilitate the continuation of the system. Conversely, this study also investigated instances of divergence highlighting the impetus for change. However, there is some evidence to suggest that accommodating reforms, which remain essentially shaped by existing practices and narratives, often lead to resistance against substantial change. In sum, the combination of convergent and divergent practices and narratives, within the complex and unique cultural and structural context of Korea, signals that while policy changes to address athlete maltreatment are emerging, barriers to fundamental, sustained change remain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Governing state-funded sport is tenuous because of the need to maintain legitimacy and support from political authorisers, stakeholders and network partners/members. The purpose of this paper is to compare/contrast how central sport agencies in Norway and New Zealand create, build or sustain legitimacy through their accountability regimes. More particularly, this comparison distinguishes between input and output sources of legitimacy, where the former is associated with democratic processes (e.g., electoral procedures and public consultation), and the latter is linked with results and demonstrable benefits. While the Norwegian Olympic and Paralympic Committee and Confederation of Sports (NIF) draws legitimacy from its representative membership structures and status as a social movement, Sport New Zealand claims legitimacy on the basis of achieving targets and outputs. In both cases there are emerging pressures to recast input-output legitimating narratives, suggesting their 'depleteability' over time. These shifts are discussed in relation to their influence on policy reforms within environments of accountability that are fluid and incomplete. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As match-fixing has emerged as a global problem, states and sports organisations have proposed a range of countermeasures. However, despite their neutral, technocratic appearance, these instruments produce their own political effects. Drawing from a case study of the 2011 South Korean ‘K-League’ football match-fixing scandal that resulted in a raft of countermeasures, this article examines how match-fixing countermeasures (re)organise the power relations within the sports betting industry. Using a qualitative, interpretive multi-method approach, three consequences are suggested. First, the education programme redefines sports ethics by delivering new codes of conduct that are aligned to the demands of betting. Second, regulations instituted by the K-League and the government frame the illegal activity as infringing upon the key stakeholders’ economic interests, further privileging the importance of the betting regime. Third, the sports betting monitoring system itself empowers the sole betting company as a trustworthy ‘fixer’ of the match-fixing problem through co-optation into its policy framework. Consequently, this study shows that key stakeholders manage the risk of losing legitimacy by showcasing their efforts to fight against match-fixing, while also taking advantage of the countermeasures to normalise the business of sports betting, thus furthering their own interests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To date there has been little explicit theorization concerning the role of risk in global migration studies. Drawing upon Beck's concept of the 'risk society,' this paper presents an investigation of the interplay between societal risk and micro-level migration decision-making. Thick historical contextualization and interview data are used to examine the process of decision-making of South Koreans' migration to New Zealand. Four risk factors were found to contribute to their 'exit' decisions: South Korea's highly competitive, work-oriented society brought about by compressed modernity; North Korea's threat of war and the South's consequent political and military culture; the home nation's obsession with education and academic performance; and the difficulties of reconciling traditional collectivist values with upward mobility. It is argued that while elements of risk may be universal, they need to be understood within specific cultural contexts and in relation to how they influence peoples' lived experiences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Migration has commonly been theorised as a process that ends with settlement in a new country and thus return visits have not been conceptualised as part of the migration experience. As has been noted in the literature, the return visit is a temporary visit to an individual’s place of birth (or the ‘external homeland’) from a current country of residence which may help immigrants to construct and negotiate a transnational identity between the new and old homes. This study focuses on how one government, South Korea, uses sport as a part of a wider strategy to encourage return visits in order to maintain cultural, economic and political connections with overseas citizens. More specifically, this paper examines the experiences of Korean immigrants living in New Zealand who return to Korea to participate in the annual National Sports Festival. Drawing upon document analysis, interviews and participant observation data, three different types of experiences emerged: (1) athletic experiences through the event itself; (2) nostalgic experiences from reconnecting with families and friends or enjoying forms of culture and entertainment difficult to access in the receiving country; and (3) political and economic experiences through interactions with politicians and business people which may contribute to mutual benefits between their old and new homes. Overall, the paper discusses the experience and implications of Koreans who represent New Zealand in an (inter)national sport and cultural festival and its influence on their transnational lives and identities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this article is to investigate how numbers come to be part of the political fabric of an ongoing debate to build a new stadium with public funds. We begin by briefly outlining the importance of numbers in the broader context of policy-making. More specifically, we situate the emphasis on numbers in governmental decision-making within the growth of 'technocracy' and more contemporary demands for 'evidence-based' policy. Drawing from an interpretive methodology of narrative analysis, we then turn to our case to illustrate how numbers came to be articulated and politicized, focusing on three inter-connected storylines: 1) the story of decline and merit, 2) the story of helplessness and control, and 3) the story of risk and assurance. In the last section we attempt to synthesize a brief comment concerning number narratives in stadium debates, particularly those associated with expertise and the implications for public trust. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sport policies are underpinned by particular interpretive frameworks or paradigms. These paradigms shape: a) the construction of policy problems, b) the alternative approaches to resolving these problems and c) what is considered to be an acceptable government intervention. This article investigates how a policy paradigm shaped the findings and recommendations of New Zealand's Ministerial Taskforce on Sport, Fitness and Leisure. Using empirical data gathered from observations of the Taskforce's consultations, interviews with Taskforce members and a review of public submissions, it is argued that a paradigm (stressing rationalization and integration) served as the basis for recommendations to reduce the number of regional sports trusts, to centralize control over the sector and to coordinate the administration of sport. Two fundamental contradictions and paradoxes arising from this paradigm shift are discussed. The first notes the historical contingencies that gave rise to the problem of fragmented sport delivery structures, including govermnent's preference for contractual agreements and decentralized control. The second examines the appropriateness of centralizing powers given the inherent need for specialized (and autonomous) delivery mechanisms. This study's focus on paradigms helps to explain how policies can alter institutional relations and the lived world of actors with respect to their identities, opportunities and capacities to act. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]