The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The politics of sport-for-development: Limited focus programmes and broad gauge problems?
Abstract
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.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Putnam, R. (2000) · doi:10.1145/358916.361990 · Cited by 17,114
Social Capital: Its Origins and Applications in Modern Sociology
Portes, A. (1998) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.1 · Cited by 12,037 · cited 2×
“For example, Portes (1998: 19) points to the danger that ‘equating social capital with the resources acquired through it can easily lead to tautological statements’ (Portes, 1998: 19) – in other words such networks can be ‘resource poor’, both internally and externally.”
BackgroundSocial Capital: Implications for Development Theory, Research, and Policy
Woolcock, M., & Narayan, D. (2000) · The World Bank Research Observer · doi:10.1093/wbro/15.2.225 · Cited by 4,339 · cited 3×
“For example, Renard (2006: 18) suggests, critically, that the broader vision of civil society in this paradigm is largely ‘non-conflictive and not overtly political’ – based on a rather romanticized communitarianism (Woolcock and Narayan, 2006) that draws closely on Putnam’s (2000) rather organic and non-political app…”
BackgroundInfluentialPawson, R. (2006) · doi:10.4135/9781849209120 · Cited by 1,791
Metadata
- Authors
- Coalter, F.
- Venue
- International Review for the Sociology of Sport
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2010-08-09
- Volume
- 45
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 295-314
- ISSN
- 1012-6902 (ISSN-L)
- 1461-7218
- OpenAlex
- W2149185547
- Cited by
- 480
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 69.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.