Olympic Idea Nowadays - Perspectives and insights

Research project undertaken by Olympic Idea Nowadays Perceptions and insights Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preuss and Lamartine DaCosta (orgs.) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon and Ana Miragaya (eds.) Edited by This book is the result of the research project undertaken by the Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, the Rio de Janeiro State University and the Olympic Studies Centre at the Autonomous University of Barcelona from 2013 to 2015. The goal of the project is to investigate the structure of values that are explicitly and implicitly associated with the Olympic Games. © of the authors, for their individual chapters © of the editorial material, Centre d’Estudis Olímpics i de l’Esport Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona ceo.uab.cat ISBN 978-84-944171-4-6 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Olympic Idea Nowadays Index of contents A holistic vision of the modern Olympic Movement: the Olympic Idea and Olympic Agenda 2020 Emilio Fernández Peña .......................................................................................................... 3 Introduction Holger Preuss & Lamartine DaCosta ..................................................................................... 7 Olympic Idea nowadays: major values approached by Olympic scholars and experts in voluntarily written essays Dikaia Chatziefstathiou & Lamartine DaCosta ...................................................................... 11 Olympic Idea nowadays: unravelling major themes and approaches from selected Olympic scholars Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya ............................................................................................. 21 How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000? Excerpts from scholars and experts ...................................................................................... Texts from scholars and experts Bruce Kidd ................................................................................................................ Susan Brownell ......................................................................................................... Nelson Todt .............................................................................................................. Dikaia Chatziefstathiou............................................................................................. Hai Ren ..................................................................................................................... Hans Lenk ................................................................................................................. Veerle De Bosscher .................................................................................................. Deanna L. Binder ..................................................................................................... Otavio Tavares .......................................................................................................... Heather L. Reid ........................................................................................................ Cesar Torres.............................................................................................................. Holger Preuss ........................................................................................................... Gavin Poynter ........................................................................................................... Robert K. Barney....................................................................................................... Vassil Girginov .......................................................................................................... Kyriaki Kaplanidou .................................................................................................... Otto Schantz ............................................................................................................. Benoit Seguin............................................................................................................ Lamartine DaCosta ................................................................................................... Bill Mallon ................................................................................................................ 33 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 55 59 61 63 65 69 71 73 75 77 81 83 85 1 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement? Excerpts from scholars and experts ...................................................................................... Texts from scholars and experts Bruce Kidd ................................................................................................................ Susan Brownell ......................................................................................................... Nelson Todt .............................................................................................................. Dikaia Chatziefstathiou............................................................................................. Hai Ren ..................................................................................................................... Hans Lenk ................................................................................................................. Veerle De Bosscher .................................................................................................. Deanna L. Binder ..................................................................................................... Otavio Tavares .......................................................................................................... Heather L. Reid ........................................................................................................ Jean-Loup Chappelet ................................................................................................ Cesar Torres.............................................................................................................. Holger Preuss ........................................................................................................... Gavin Poynter ........................................................................................................... Robert K. Barney....................................................................................................... David Wallechinsky................................................................................................... Vassil Girginov .......................................................................................................... Otto Schantz ............................................................................................................. Benoit Seguin............................................................................................................ Lamartine DaCosta ................................................................................................... Bill Mallon ................................................................................................................ Ana Miragaya............................................................................................................ 2 89 93 95 97 99 103 105 109 115 119 121 125 127 129 131 133 135 137 141 143 145 147 149 Olympic Idea Nowadays A holistic vision of the modern Olympic Movement: the Olympic Idea and Olympic Agenda 2020 Emilio Fernández Peña Director Centre d’Estudis Olímpics i de l’Esport Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (Spain) Transcending the pure field of sport as practise and joy has provided Olympism with a powerful narrative or storytelling which connects it with a profound human need: the need for a sense, the search for meaning. With its roots in antiquity, with its symbols and rituals, Olympism has offered to the mere sport practice quality values which have reinforced them in Olympism’s vocation of universal scope. These are elements which constitute the core of the culture of Olympism and embody the distinguishing characteristics of the Olympic Movement. The Olympic Games would not have achieved global transcendence if it had not been for their capacity to adapt to the various times with the pragmatic vision of the economic issue: to become financially independent through the commercialization of television rights in addition to the different TOP sponsors programs, for example. Other pragmatic and recent innovation is represented by Olympic Agenda 2020. This document has been the product of a global debate of different actors, with more than 40,000 contributions from all over the world, which were processed by 14 working groups. This document was approved during the 127th IOC Session in Monaco in December 2014. Significantly, Olympic Agenda 2020 constitutes a way of anticipating changes by the IOC. According to the address of the IOC president, Thomas Bach, during the aforementioned Monaco’s Session, “We want to be the leaders of change, not the objects of change”. Along the last 20 years a number of key aspects have been recurring in the great discourse of the Olympic Movement. These are: gender equality, the governance of 3 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) the Olympic Movement, ethics in Olympic sport, the role of media and sponsorship and sustainability of the organisation of the Olympics. Some of these key aspects are transversal, which means that they are present throughout the referred Agenda. In this sense, it seems as if Olympic Agenda 2020 had been conceived as a system which disclosed the need for an overall approach to the challenges of the Olympic Movement. Unsurprisingly, the paradigmatic case of this transversality is the issue of sustainability, which is mentioned along several points at the opening of Olympic Agenda 2020. Sustainability appears in various Recommendations, for example: Recommendation 1.2, “the IOC to actively promote the maximum use of existing facilities and the use of temporary and demountable venues”; Recommendation 3, “reducing the cost of bidding” is connected with this idea too, as well as sustainability and legacy, which are key elements in the evaluation process. At the same time, this idea must be applied to the daily operation of the Olympic Movement. Therefore, sustainability represents a key concept in this Olympic Agenda, which affects the whole Olympic Movement: the IOC, Organizing Committees, Olympic Federations and athletes. The gender equality issue was introduced by President Juan Antonio Samaranch at the end of his mandate in the early 2000s. In this sense Olympic Agenda 2020 also chose to “foster gender equality” (Recommendation 15). The collaboration of the IOC with the International Federations aimed to “achieve a 50 percent” female participation in the Games and also to “encourage the inclusion of mixed-gender team events”, which constitutes an extraordinary innovation. In addition, ethics issues are centered on “protecting the clean athletes”, creating educational programs and fostering research against doping. In spite of the limited room of this document, the part devoted to television and new media shows a holistic aim in which the different parts are interconnected, which affects other elements of the Olympic Agenda. For instance, the new policy of transparency (Recommendation 29) adopted by the IOC seems to be an heir to the spirit of the time in which social media and the new media based on the Internet protocol acquired a key role in the construction of the reality of Olympism. On the other hand, Recommendation 36, “extend access to the Olympic brand for noncommercial use”, is connected with the prominent and increasing role of social media play in the dissemination of the Olympic culture. In this concern the launch of the Olympic Channel (Recommendation 19) refers to the need for the creation of audio-visual media for the Olympic Movement delivered through the Internet. Traditionally, television has been the main source of funding of the Olympic Games since Juan Antonio Samaranch’s mandate. Television turns local events into global events; in this medium, the Olympic Games have found their main ally for disseminating positive values about sport and its imaginary. There is, however, an element of symbiosis about this alliance between the Olympic Games and 4 Olympic Idea Nowadays television. To the Olympic Games, television has been a dissemination tool, a medium for broadcasting moving images and sound and for bringing athletes’ successes and failures into people’s homes, turning the Olympic stadium into a geostrategic stage where absence is as important as presence. Summarizing, television constructs the reality of the Olympic Games for viewers, and it makes that reality a global one. The new Olympic channel delivered through the Internet will be necessarily social to trigger its capacities of dissemination. This tool is directly related to Recommendation 23, which highlights the need to engage the communities, constructing a virtual hub for athletes and promoting interaction between volunteers, stakeholders and the public in general. In these communities the IOC must use a new, more direct language, prompting them to become authentic protagonists of the communication process, creating communication flow, and turning them into advocates of the Olympic cause within their own communities. Surely the authors of the texts found in the pages ahead represent a virtual community envisaged by Olympic Agenda 2020. Simply put, from distinct countries and continents, they are scholars who share the Olympic Idea through their researches and studies and who accepted the invitation for the elaboration of this e-book issued by the Olympic Studies Centre from the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. The invitation took place during the debates which led to the Olympic Agenda 2020’s collective composition. Therefore, this book encompasses the search for global and holistic directions which aim at the future of the Olympic Movement. Moreover, reviews of these directions were additionally made by two updated researches which had already taken into account Olympic Agenda 2020’s references and aims. In this concern, our Olympic Studies Centre, keeping in mind its traditions, expects to meet Olympic Agenda 2020’s proposals launching this publication in the perspective of a continuing progress towards the future. In the expectations of Recommendation 23 lies also the central meaning of the present book as far as it is a result of a construction joining voluntary participants of a survey on the Olympic idea, a long-lasting conception cultivated by the Olympic Movement throughout its existence. Briefly, since Pierre de Coubertin’s time, the Olympic idea has anticipated the holistic view often presupposed by Coubertin’s followers and now again brought into light by Olympic Agenda 2020. 5 Olympic Idea Nowadays Introduction Holger Preuss Lamartine DaCosta Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz (Germany) State University of Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) In May 2013 we were sitting together in Leblon, Rio de Janeiro, thinking about the Olympic world regarding the upcoming Games in Rio 2016. At that time Dr Thomas Bach was not the President of the IOC and Olympic Agenda 2020 had not been written. A few days after our conversation, right before the 2013 Confederations Cup, many thousands of Brazilian citizens protested against corruption and cost overruns regarding the 2014 Brazilian FIFA World Cup. Still, in that very year European cities started referendums to ask their population if they were willing to have Olympic Games staged in their country and some of them cancelled their bids for the 2022 Winter Olympic Games. Some months later the Olympic Movement received severely negative comments from the press in many countries regarding several issues related to Sochi 2014 (non-payment of workers, ecological damages, incredible high construction costs and homophobia). It was also around that time that public protests against FIFA and its 2014 World Cup started in Brazil. We then initially agreed that we should investigate whether the Olympic values were at stake or we were only facing conflictive interests. To begin with we took into account that the general public and, especially local residents, whether in Brazil or in Europe, have turned out to be important stakeholders in the bidding for and in the hosting of mega sport events (Preuss, 2008, 2013; Preuss & Solberg, 2006). Many of them have already shown that they do not favour staging such events. As an immediate reaction to a possible candidature to the 2022 Winter Olympic Games, the populations of Graubünden (Switzerland), Krakow (Poland), and Munich (Germany) showed their disapproval in the referenda. Furthermore, the former Applicant Cities Stockholm and Oslo withdrew their candidatures due to political opposition, which can usually be considered nourished by voters’ concerns. Koenecke et al. (2015) identified that the reasons against the Games were: 7 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) a) concerns towards the IOC (and FIFA and all other sport organizations) such as mistrust against elite sport organisations in general, greed for profit, lack of transparency, oppressive contracts; b) concerns about negative consequences of hosting Olympic Games regarding cost explosions (which was learnt from non-sport or other sport projects with severe cost overruns) or environmental damages; c) critiques of authoritarian or undemocratic states that seem to misuse the Games and their idea for their hidden political agenda; d) concerns that the Olympic Games and the Olympic Movement are not really based on their Olympic idea / ideals and lost their fight against (financial) gigantism; e) no need for investments in the bid country or city due to already high living standards. In particular the last two points addressed our interest in developing this research project now being presented in this book. We thought about contacting and inviting our friends to discuss with them whether they agree that the Olympic Idea and respective values have changed and are losing their power and prestige. Right away it became clear that just having a sample of friends responding to our questioning will never become solid research nor would it ever display a picture worth publishing. Then we opted to design a broader research around the “Olympic Idea nowadays” and exchanged ideas with other colleagues. Soon we agreed that we should do an intensive study assembling additional studies to deeply understand the changes the Olympic idea and its values have been through and/or have been altered along the years. Actually, those in-depth studies are coming to an end hosted by Johannes Gutenberg University in Mainz, Germany, and expected to be published elsewhere. The very first study aimed to identify the main Olympic scholars in the world who would be in a position to participate in the research. We sent an online-questionnaire to a group of approximately 1,500 Olympic scholars and Olympic experts worldwide. The scholars addressed were listed by functional identification from the following sources: a) The IOC Olympic Studies Centre; b) Olympic Studies Centers in Barcelona, London Ontario (ICOS), Sydney, Cologne, Loughborough, and Rio de Janeiro; c) Beijing Sport University (BSU); d) Brazilian universities of Rio de Janeiro, Porto Alegre, and Victoria; e) Russian International Olympic University (RIOU); f) The International Olympic Academy, Olympia (IOA); g) The National Olympic Academies in Africa; h) Taiwan Sport Management Community and Olympic Researcher; i) The European Association of Sport Management (EASM) and the International Association of Sport Economists (IASE); j) The International Society of Olympic Historians (ISOH); k) ISDPA (500+ scholars and practitioners in sport for development and peace); 8 Olympic Idea Nowadays l) Personal networks of Holger Preuss and Lamartine DaCosta. We avoided contacting individuals from inside the Olympic family such as IOC, IFs or NOC members. As a result of this first step, we ended up collecting 190 complete data sets from participant scholars of 46 nations. The questionnaire in English was set online between January 27th and February 7th, 2014. In order to find the main scholars we asked three questions. “Which Olympic scholars, if any, pop up in your mind first when you think about Olympic Research?” (Name and field/area of research for up to 3 scholars can be given in the fields below. – Please do not mention yourself.). This question was followed by “With which Olympic scholar(s) would you like to write a paper that is related to the Olympics?” (Name and field/area of research for up to 3 scholars can be given in the fields below.). Finally we asked “Which Olympic scholars would you recommend to one who wanted to study the Olympic Games?” The result was that the 190 respondents mentioned 230 scholars with 842 votes (3.66 per scholar on average). The cut off was therefore planned for scholars that were named 4 or more times. After the identification of the 40 scholars who were recommended most often, we sent them invitations to participate in the research. In all, we had 12 countries represented, summing up coincidentally 12 research interests. From the 40 selected scholars, we collected 23 answers from 10 nations as it can be ascertained in the chapters ahead. In other additional study with Delphi methodology, the sample of the 40 scholars was again used to assess the status of the Olympic Idea and its correspondent values in another approach of understanding. For the initial direct contacts with the 40 scholars, the Olympic Studies Centre of the Autonomous University of Barcelona, Spain, provided the managerial support under the direction of Emilio Fernandez and Berta Cerezuela. We avoided directly asking the scholars to write about the Olympic Idea or Olympic values. We also tried to avoid having the focus of the essays only on problems or success of the last Games (something they had in their mind). We decided then to ask the scholars to write about the immediate past Games (summer and winter edition) and the overall changes from Sydney 2000 until today. As a result, the already mentioned 23 replies from respondent scholars included 43 one-page essays which focused on the following: a) Please describe how London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement. b) Please describe how the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000, and how you believe it will develop in the near future. Not all scholars who were addressed answered the invitation or wanted to participate in the research. The countries with more participant researchers (four in each case) are Brazil (Lamartine DaCosta, Nelson Todt, Otávio Tavares, Ana Miragaya), Canada (Bruce Kidd, Deanna L. Binder, Robert K. Barney, Benoit Seguin) and the United States 9 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) (Susan Brownell, Heather L. Reid, David Wallechinsky, Bill Mallon). They are followed by Germany, with three scholars (Hans Lenk, Holger Preuss, Otto Schantz) and Greece, with two contributors (Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Kyriaki Kaplanidou). The book also features texts written by scholars from Argentina (Cesar R. Torres), Belgium (Veerle De Bosscher), Bulgaria (Vassil Girginov), China (Hai Ren), Switzerland (Jean-Loup Chappelet) and United Kingdom (Gavin Poynter). The overarching idea of the research was previously to qualitatively investigate the view those respondent Olympic scholars have of the Olympic Idea and Olympic ideals nowadays, reviewing their interpretation of Olympic values. Olympic scholars are researchers who have been gathering information about the Olympic Games and the Olympic Movement for many years. They are able to observe reality and articulate their thoughts. Furthermore, they are independent from the Movement and devote their research to find updated interpretations. This e-book is mainly the presentation of the 43 essays and of two research papers about the meaning of their contents. These exploratory investigations were developed by Xavier Ramon (Olympic Studies Centre – Autonomous University of Barcelona), Ana Miragaya (Universidade Estacio de Sa, Petropolis - Brazil) and Dikaia Chatziefstathiou (Panteion University, Athens). Thus far, we must thank those scholars who made this book finally happen. Moreover, the additional researches now also being completed kept the original focus on values as proposed by the invitation of 2014, providing an overall discussion on the association of values to Olympic Games and also to Olympic Agenda 2020, which recently created collective perspectives to the future of the Olympic Movement and its stakeholders. It is very important to mention that the Olympic Studies Centre of Universidad Autonoma de Barcelona made all these accomplishments happen putting them into a book’s project with free access. Certainly, the e-book on behalf of its authors and researchers is a necessary step to provide important implications to Olympic organizations (IOC, NOCs, OCOGs, and NOA) to enable them to “revitalize” certain values of the Olympic Games. Finally, the e-book is to potentially create “basic knowledge” for future Olympic research related to the Olympic Values and to the Olympic Idea. After all, the questions raised in Rio de Janeiro in May 2013 became more valid when brought forward to international concerns. 10 Olympic Idea Nowadays Olympic Idea nowadays: major values approached by Olympic scholars and experts in voluntarily written essays Dikaia Chatziefstathiou Lamartine DaCosta Canterbury Christ Church University (UK) Panteion University of Social & Political Sciences (Greece) State University of Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) Introduction The present investigation comprises 42 short essays voluntarily elaborated by 23 scholars and experts who participated in a group of 190 respondents of the survey “Olympic Ideals as seen by Olympic Scholars and Experts” (Preuss, Schütte, Könecke & DaCosta, 2014), which was originally denominated “Olympic Idea – Nowadays – OIN” research. Two questions were posed to the essays’ authors: (1) “How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000? How do you think it will develop in the near future?”, and (2) “How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement?”. A total of 20 essays reflected on the first question while 22 addressed the second one. This article proposes a qualitative content analysis of the essays in order to detect social interrelationships from the meaning of the discourses provided by the target respondents, that is, the 23 scholars and experts related to Olympic Studies. The objective of the intended content analysis is to shed light on the meaning and the changes of values that are associated with the Olympic Games. In this concern, the delimitation of values as subject matter includes broader as well as overlapping meanings and formats provided by the essays’ authors, who are men and women from various age brackets, cultures and mostly independent from the Olympic Movement’s institutional management requirements. 11 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) In this context of analysis, values are understood according to Chatziefstathiou’s (2005) choice to detect values-led meanings in texts related to Olympic matters; the definition apud Young (1977): “the normative standards by which human beings are influenced in their choice among the alternative actions which they perceive”. In addition to the central focus on values of modern Olympic Games bringing meanings across different disciplines, the OIN investigation also examined the thematic approaches of the essays. Ramon & Miragaya identified the themes and keywords used by the 23 OIN scholars and experts to describe the changes in the Olympic Movement since 2000 and also to describe how London 2012 and Sochi 2014 had changed or supported the Olympic Movement. In brief, keywords were referred to the significant terms highlighted in the essays while themes were the predominant topics of inquiry addressed by the authors, that is, the main subjects discussed (e.g.: equality, sustainability, legacy, governance, etc.). The OIN research ultimately aimed to identify the values and their changing patterns, if any, as found through content analysis of the essays, complementing the search of dominant themes. In other words, although the Olympic Movement’s documents (the Olympic Charter, for instance) address the Olympic values as principles, the day-to-day communication often makes them acknowledged in different formats and understanding. Furthermore, there are values connected with the Olympics by deductive or inductive interpretations despite the fact that they are not always explicitly present in the writings of the Olympic Movement’s developments. Methodology In general terms, content analysis is often embedded in empirical documentation (written, iconic, multimedia, etc.) from which contextualized – explicit or implicit – interpretations are made in search of trustworthy inferences that may objectively identify typical characteristics of messages (Krippendorff, 2004; Tipaldo, 2014). These procedures have been supported by Altheide (1996), mainly in terms of interplay between deductive and inductive approaches to categories of analysis applied to subject text, a flexible process that may include additional categories. This process of disclosure is deductive when it primarily refers to the research question, to the respective literature review and to the selection of texts for the analysis. Afterwards the process might as well make inductive options as interpretations of textual discourses and the elaboration of their codification as emphasized by Chatziefstathiou (2005), who had used content analysis as the methodological path in her research on the hypothetical changing nature of Olympism. In this regard, the values identified in that investigation were classified as “Olympic”, a procedure also pursued by the present study. 12 Olympic Idea Nowadays The reciprocal relationships of deductive with inductive approaches to the 42 essays of this book are finally inserted on various grids in order to organize data analysis as referred to a coding system and the categories designed to examine respective contents throughout the research. Again, according to Chatziefstathiou (2005), the final matrices are a core and central tool into which every unit of analysis must belong to one or more categories that affect the subject matter in addition to frames with primary interpretations. These complementary references are judgments of prevailing meanings and explicit or suggested perspectives also manifested by the authors of the texts under examination. Results Figure 1 depicts a first hand approach to the Olympic values detected in the essays referred to circumstances brought into light by the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games. In sum, these essays unraveled three distinct groups of values ranked by number of incidences. The first group represents a concentration of the changes needed towards ethical and humanistic attitudes. This group of values emerged with a strong emphasis on ‘equality’, ‘education’, ‘environment’ and ‘human rights’. At the same time, they kept the Games with their tradition of athleticism by additionally putting the focus on the search of ‘personal excellence’. The second group of values of the same Figure 1 includes two values: (i) ‘blending sport with culture, education and environment’ and (ii) ‘sustainability’. These choices apparently anticipate the future as they are based upon Sydney’s experiences. After all, the consolidation of discourse on environment and sustainability would mostly be a response to the claim “greening of the Games”, which embedded the 2000 Olympics, according to DaCosta (2002, p. 141), but not yet reached. The last group of values includes ‘respect for others’, ‘internationalism’, ‘peace’, ‘fair play’, ‘multicultural understanding’, ‘joy of effort’, ‘unity’ and ‘balance between body, will and mind’, which had lower incidence. This group of values was disclosed as a typical relationship built with dialogue, communication and personal and group equilibrium as earlier also described by DaCosta (1997). Overall, the values-led approaches to the Sydney’s question were supposed to keep the symbolic meaning of the Olympic Games alive. 13 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) Figure 1. Olympic Games after Sydney 2000 - Incidence of Olympic Values in 20 scholars’ essays Unity of analysis % of total Categories – Detected VALUES (EQUIVALENCE OF VALUE) Number of incidences Essays – 28,5% EQUALITY 6 Essays – 19,4% STRIVING FOR PERSONAL EXCELLENCE 4 Essays – 19,4% EDUCATION AND ENVIRONMENT 4 Essays – 19,4% SPORT AS A HUMAN RIGHT BLENDING SPORT WITH CULTURE, EDUCATION AND ENVIRONMENT 4 4 Essays – 19,4% SUSTAINABILITY 4 Essays – 9.5% Essays – 9.5% RESPECT FOR OTHERS 3 INTERNATIONALISM 2 Essays – 9.5% PEACE (OLYMPIC TRUCE) 2 Essays – 9.5% FAIR PLAY 2 Essays – 9.5% MULTICULTURAL UNDERSTANDING 2 Essays – 4.7% JOY OF EFFORT 1 Essays – 4.7% TORCH RELAY (UNITY) 1 Essays – 4.7% BALANCE BETWEEN BODY, WILL AND MIND 1 Essays – 19,4% It is also relevant to scrutinize the results summarized in Figure 2 (Olympic Games after London 2012 and Sochi 2014). The Olympic values identified are similar to those already exposed in Figure 1. Nevertheless, the views of the respondents of the second question on London and Sochi impacts are distinct from Sydney’s interpretations. Again, the value ‘equality’ emerges with great comparative importance as it was detected in 47.8% of the essays as opposed to 28.5% as it appears in Figure 1. There is also a second group representing views of an advanced future for the Games as follows: ‘internationalism’, ‘sport as a human right’, ‘blending sport with culture, education and environment’, ‘multicultural understanding’ and ‘sustainability’. The third assemblage of values is a typical reflex of the Olympic Movement traditions putting together ‘education and environment’, ‘peace’, ‘personal excellence’, ‘fair play’ and ‘joy of effort’. In all, the London and Sochi visions increased the importance of ethical attitudes already detected in the Sydney essays, also claiming for advancements in global and multicultural developments mostly referred to sustainability. 14 Olympic Idea Nowadays Figure 2. Olympic Games after London 2012 and Sochi 2014 - Incidence of Olympic Values in 22 scholars’ essays Unity of analysis Categories – Detected VALUES % of total (EQUIVALENCE OF VALUE) Essays – 47.8% EQUALITY Number of incidences 11 Essays – 17.3% INTERNATIONALISM 4 Essays – 13.0% SPORT AS A HUMAN RIGHT 3 Essays – 13.0% BLENDING SPORT WITH CULTURE, EDUCATION AND ENVIRONMENT 3 Essays – 13.0% Essays – 13.0% MULTICULTURAL UNDERSTANDING SUSTAINABILITY 3 3 Essays – 8.6% EDUCATION AND ENVIRONMENT 2 Essays – 8.6% PEACE (OLYMPIC TRUCE) 2 Essays – 4.3% STRIVING FOR PERSONAL EXCELLENCE 1 Essays – 4.3% FAIR PLAY 1 Essays – 4.3% JOY OF EFFORT 1 In both cases, the content analysis of Figures 1 and 2 displays critical comments in addition to remarks on the status quo of Olympic Games’ management expressed by the respondent scholars. Figure 3 shows the main focuses of the essays and their tones of writing. The answers to Sydney’s question reveal that 38.0% of the essays focused on changes needed in the Olympic Movement while 33.3% pointed out lack of definitions. Moreover, for London and Sochi’s replies, those figures decrease respectively to 30.4% and 17.3%. In brief, either the dominant approaches or the values-led positions found in the essays are supportive to the assessment of meaning and changes of values that are associated with the Olympic Games. Figure 3. Percentages of tones of writings by essays’ main focus Essays - Main focus Sydney Tones of writings - % CRITICAL APPROACHES : 71.3% Changes needed: 38.0% Lack of definitions: 33.3% COMMENTS ON THE STATUS QUO Management requirements: 76.1% London & Sochi CRITICAL APPROACHES : 47.8% Changes needed: 30.4% Lack of definitions: 17.3% COMMENTS ON THE STATUS QUO Management requirements: 52.1% 15 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) Discussion Taking into consideration the above results, Figure 4 exhibits an aggregation of approaches – that is, themes attained by the essays and previously organized by Ramon & Miragaya – into which the Olympic values ascertained by Sydney’s reviews (Figure 1) were reset by correlation of meanings. The adaptability of these values regarding the major themes chosen by OIN authors had a positive answer only in six of the total 24 approaches detected. Thus the Olympic values explicitly found in the texts or those detected by interpretations might primarily be seen as referencial meanings to spotlight authors’ elaborations. This result suggests that the texts are more factual and analytical than value-based in their arguments. In other words, scholars and experts on Olympic issues mostly discuss circumstances involving Olympic matters using their academic or technical background instead of principles and tradition of the Olympic Movement. Figure 4. Olympic Games after Sydney 2000 – Correlation of thematic approaches (frequency) with Olympic values (incidence) detected in the essays Approaches N (authors) Legacy (7) VALUES N (authors) Commercialization (4) Approaches N (authors) Accountability (2) Corporate sponsorship (2) Doping (4) Corruption (4) Increasing costs (4) Diversity (2) Youth Olympic Games (4) Entertainment (2) Betting (3) Environmental issues (2) Decreasing bids (3) Gender equality (3) EQUALITY (6) Leveraging (2) Marketing (2) Governance reforms (3) EXCELLENCE (4) Olympic brand protection (2) Human rights (3) HUMAN RIGHTS (4) Organizational model (2) Olympic Values (3) Sustainability (3) VALUES N (authors) MULTICULTURAL UNDERSTANDING (2) EDUCATION AND ENVIRONMENT (4) Reforms (2) SUSTAINABILITY (4) Transparency (2) The 15% increase in having Olympic values as references would however be explained by the pressures from circumstances met by London and Sochi status also included in Figure 5, such as homophobia, gender inequality, gigantism of the Olympic Games, among others. Overall, said Olympic values are immutable or universal – common expressions inter alia discussed by Parry (2009, p. 3-4), it is not a guarantee to take them in consideration. Data from Figures 4 and 5 demonstrate that the Olympic values are not starting points for scholars’ and experts’ arguments as far as these referential 16 Olympic Idea Nowadays statements were suggestively used when they were more suitable for positioning declarations. Figure 5. Olympic Games after London 2012 and Sochi 2014 – Correlation of thematic approaches (frequency) with Olympic values (incidence) detected in the essays Approaches N (authors) Homophobia (6) VALUES N (authors) EQUALITY (11) Increasing costs (6) Legacy (5) Sportswomen (5) Commercialization (4) Gender equality (4) Governance (4) Human rights (3) EQUALITY (11) Environment (2) Gigantism (2) Grassroots participation (2) Infrastructure (2) Multiculturalism (2) EQUALITY (11) SPORT AS A HUMAN RIGHT (3) Olympic Values (3) Sustainability (3) Approaches N (authors) VALUES N (authors) EDUCATION AND ENVIRONMENT (2) INTERNATIONALISM (4) MULTICULTURAL UNDERSTANDING (3) Nationalism (2) New Olympic sports (2) Peace (2) PEACE (2) Spectacularization (2) SUSTAINABILITY (3) Temporary venues (2) Bids withdrawal (2) Urban regeneration (2) Commodification (2) Youth Olympic Games (2) BLENDING SPORT WITH CULTURE, EDUCATION AND ENVIRONMENT (3) Education (2) To test the inductive remark that considers Olympic values immutable but not necessarily indispensable, again this research adapted the aggregation of major themes of OIN essays including correlations with the Olympic Agenda 2020, originally constructed by Ramon & Miragaya and added to this book. This Agenda was issued at the end of 2014 by the International Olympic Committee synthesizing 40,000 suggestions received by the public and IOC’s stakeholders focusing on future scenarios to frame the Olympic Games and the Olympic Movement (IOC, 2014). Case in point, the adaptation consisted in selecting common Olympic values – here called “core values” - from Figures 1 and 2, then inserting them in Figure 6 in the items that offer some correlation with both major themes and Agenda 2020 recommendations. As a result, 66,6% of correlated items summarized by Figure 6 were able to enclose core Olympic values, making them fit to present days’ discussions on the status and future of the Olympic Movement and subsidiary actions. 17 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) Figure 6. Correlation between the themes and core values covered by OIN scholars and the major themes and keywords emerged from Olympic Agenda 2020 Themes and OLYMPIC VALUES OIN essays / CORE VALUES DETECTED OLYMPIC AGENDA 2020 / Summary of recommendations Sports policy and sports participation / SPORT AS A HUMAN RIGHT Management and organization / MULTICULTURAL UNDERSTANDING / INTERNATIONALISM Sports policy; sports participation. Support to athletes; sports lab/sports organization programmes Management; organization. Flexibility of Olympic Games management; bidding; Olympic programme; sport-based to event-based programme; relationships with other organizations, professional leagues and NGOs; maximize synergies with stakeholders; cooperation and networking; strategic partnerships; advocacy; Youth Olympic Games positioning Governance. Good governance; accountability; transparency; integrity; opposition to any form of corruption; IOC membership (age limit, targeted recruitment); IOC commissions composition Communications. Olympic channel Legacy; Sustainability. Lasting and dynamic legacy; postGames monitoring of the Games legacy; sustainability strategy; sustainability in daily operations Olympic values and education. Spread Olympic values-based education; ethics; clean athletes; blend sport and culture Olympic Laurel (culture, education, development and peace); Sport for Hope; dialogue with society and within the Olympic Movement Economics. Size of the Games; cost reduction Governance / PERSONAL EXCELLENCE Media and communications Legacy and sustainability / SUSTAINABILITY Olympic values and education / EDUCATION AND ENVIRONMENT / BLENDING SPORT WITH CULTURE Economics / SUSTAINABILITY Equality / no discrimination / EQUALITY Marketing and sponsorship Urban development / SUSTAINABILITY Problems and tensions concerning Olympism Politics Equality; Gender equality; non-discrimination on sexual orientation Marketing; sponsorship. TOP sponsors’ engagement with NOCs and “Olympism in Action” programmes; global licensing programme; Olympic brand for non-commercial use Legacy; sustainability; bidding Education and awareness programmes and projects to solve existing problems (match-fixing, manipulation of competitions, related corruption, doping) Politics. Independent advice on political conditions Conclusions This investigation has collected data from 42 essays written by international volunteer top scholars and experts with experience on Olympic Games’ issues. As previously proposed, the overview of those essays has allowed both researchers to highlight 8 core Olympic values of contemporary discussion related to the Olympic Movement: ‘equality’, ‘sustainability’, ‘education and environment’, ‘blending sport with culture’, 18 Olympic Idea Nowadays ‘personal excellence’, ‘sport as human right’, ‘multicultural understanding’ and ‘internationalism’. These dominant values eventually are in correspondence with major themes emerged as a result either of the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games impacts or of the London 2012 and Sochi 2014 Olympics effects. However, evidences came out from the matrix of the content analysis’ results (Figures 1 and 2) suggesting that the respondent authors were mostly driven by context-based and inductive influences in their London-Sochi outlooks. They also reacted with experience-based and deductive judgments in the elaboration of Sydney’s perspectives. This assumption stands henceforth as a corollary to acknowledge Olympic values as contingent of situational influences in their peculiar employment. Thus, meaning and changes of Olympic values must be better appropriated by means of two central characterizations: situation-based and circulation status. Summarizing, the state-of-the-art Olympic values as here accomplished corroborates the research carried on by Chatziefstathiou (2005, p. ii), who demonstrated that the Olympic values are not an immutable set of guiding principles as proposed by the Olympic Charter. Instead they are consensual constructions highlighting the diversity of meanings of their cultural and sportive backgrounds of nowadays. Coincidentally, DaCosta (1998) proposed earlier for the historical re-interpretation of the Olympic values, the theory of “process philosophy” to follow up the continuing changes of external influences into the Olympic Games and their partner organizations. These frameworks are here and now entitled to shed light on the implementation of Olympic Agenda 2020 in the next-to-come years. References Altheide, D.L. (1996). Qualitative Media Analysis. California, USA: Sage.p, 16. Chatziefstathiou, D. (2005). The Changing Nature of the Ideology of Olympism in the Modern Olympic Era. Doctoral Thesis submitted to Loughborough University – UK. DaCosta, L.P. (2002). Searching the Optimum Dimensions for the Games: Gigantism or Sustainability? In DaCosta, L.P. (Ed) Olympic Studies, Rio de Janeiro: Editora Gama Filho, p. 6990. Open access: http://library.la84.org/SportsLibrary/Books/OlympicStudies.pdf DaCosta, L. (1998) Olympism and the equilibrium of man. In Mueller, N. (ed.), Coubertin et l'Olympisme: questions pour l'avenir: Le Havre 1897-1997. Rapport du congrès du 17 au 20 septembre 1997 a l’Université du Havre. Lausanne: Comité International Pierre de Coubertin, p. 188 – 199. IOC (2014). Olympic Agenda 2020. 20+20 recommendations. Lausanne: International Olympic Committee. http://www.olympic.org/Documents/Olympic_Agenda_2020/Olympic_Agenda_2020-2020_Recommendations-ENG.pdf Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. p. 413. 19 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) Parry, J. (2009) Ethical & Political Values of the Olympic Movement. International Chair of Olympic Studies. Louvain: Ghent University. Preuss, H., Schütte, N., Könecke, T. & DaCosta, L. (2014) Olympic Ideals as seen by Olympic Scholars and Experts. Mainzer Papers on Sports Economics & Management. Working Paper no 1. Tipaldo, G. (2014). L'analisi del contenuto e i mass media. Bologna, IT: Il Mulino. p. 42. 20 Olympic Idea Nowadays Olympic Idea nowadays: unravelling major themes and approaches from selected Olympic scholars Xavier Ramon Ana Miragaya Olympic Studies Centre Autonomous University of Barcelona (Spain) Universidade Estacio de Sa, Petropolis (Brazil) Introduction This research provides an overview of the prominent themes and approaches chosen by the 23 volunteer scholars and experts who participated in the Olympic Idea Nowadays (OIN) e-book. More specifically, this study had three core purposes: (i) to identify the central themes covered by the participant scholars; (ii) to present, both visually and textually, the main keywords used by these scholars to discuss and reflect on the two questions posed by the research: (1) “How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000? How do you think it will develop in the near future?”, and (2) “How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement?”; and (iii) to compare these themes against the ones cited in Olympic Agenda 2020. After outlining the methodology and the procedure employed, the presentation of the findings is supported by images generated with the software Wordle. Methodology The qualitative content analysis technique (Altheide, 1996; Bryman, 2012) allowed the researchers to read, interpret and make valid inferences about the 43 essays included in the e-book Olympic Idea Nowadays. A total of 22 texts reflected on the first question (“How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000? How do you think it will develop in the near future?”), while 23 texts addressed the second 21 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) question (“How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement?”). A set of explicit rules and predetermined categories guided the investigation from the start: (i) themes and keywords to describe the changes in the Olympic Movement since 2000 and (ii) keywords to describe how London 2012 and Sochi 2014 had changed or supported the Olympic Movement. It is important to consider that keywords refer to the significant terms highlighted in the essays to reflect on the changes since Sydney 2000 and London 2012/Sochi 2014 Olympics; they are methodological tools. Themes are the predominant topics of inquiry addressed by researchers, that is, the main subjects discussed (e.g.: Equality / no discrimination; Economics); meanings carried by keywords that appear more frequently in the text. Due to the large number of different terms used by the OIN authors, 5 to 10 relevant keywords were selected per text. It is then essential to point out that the researchers’ perspective and orientation play an important role in the interpretation of meanings of messages in qualitative investigations (Altheide, 1996; Marshall and Rossman, 2011), and therefore, they also influenced to some extent the selection of the keywords. Nevertheless, the choice of those terms was cross-checked in this study so that it more accurately reflected the tone and approach of each of the essays. To conduct the content analysis, a Google Docs form was created. This form allowed the researchers to codify and manage the content of each essay, enabling the collection and the treatment of data with Microsoft Excel. At this stage, some keywords were homogenized (e.g.: “Commercialism” was recorded as “Commercialization”) in order to avoid duplicities and overlaps. Finally, with the objective of presenting the information in a visually attractive way, results were incorporated into Wordle, a free online-based software developed by IBM to generate word clouds. According to Dart (2014: 651), Wordle is an emerging visualization format in the academic environment, which “uses word frequency to establish different weightings, with the words presented in different font sizes to indicate the numerical value: that is, the larger the font, the more times the word appeared”. In this specific research, certain keywords stand out as a way of highlighting key contextual data (affiliation of scholars) as well as illustrating the main themes and approaches chosen by scholars. Results Countries and affiliations The e-book includes essays written by 23 volunteer top scholars from 11 countries of different parts of the world, revealing a wide diversity in geographical, cultural and academic grounds. The percentages of participation of countries can be seen in Figure 1. The countries with more participant researchers (four in each case) are Brazil (Lamartine DaCosta, Nelson Todt, Otávio Tavares, Ana Miragaya), Canada (Bruce Kidd, 22 Olympic Idea Nowadays Deanna L. Binder, Robert K. Barney, Benoit Seguin) and the United States (Susan Brownell, Heather L. Reid, David Wallechinsky, Bill Mallon). They are followed by Germany, with three scholars (Hans Lenk, Holger Preuss, Otto Schantz) and Greece, with two contributors (Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Kyriaki Kaplanidou). The book also features texts written by scholars from Argentina (Cesar R. Torres), Belgium (Veerle De Bosscher), Bulgaria (Vassil Girginov), China (Hai Ren), Switzerland (Jean-Loup Chappelet) and United Kingdom (Gavin Poynter). Figure 1. Percentages of the participation of scholars by country COUNTRIES PERCENTAGE Brazil Canada United States Germany Greece Argentina Belgium Bulgaria China Switzerland United Kingdom 17.4% 17.4% 17.4% 13% 8.7% 4.3% 4.3% 4.3% 4.3% 4.3% 4.3% As it can be perceived from Figure 2, researchers represent a broad range of organizations. In fact, the International Society of Olympic Historians is the only institution with two affiliated authors (Wallechinsky and Mallon). Figure 2. Affiliation of the participant scholars and experts 23 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) Major themes of the research and comparison with Olympic Agenda 2020 In thematic terms, the research reveals that contributors highlighted 12 dominant topics of inquiry (see Figure 3). The most prominent themes in the academic discussion were Economics (pointed out by 14 of the authors), Legacy and sustainability (13 authors), Management and organization and Equality/ no discrimination (12 authors), followed by Governance, Problems and tensions concerning Olympism, as well as Sports Policy – Sports participation (mentioned each by 10 authors). Leaving those primary issues aside, other core themes that were emphasized include Marketing and sponsorship (7), Olympic Education and Values (7), Politics (6), Media and communications (5) and Urban Development (3). It should be taken into account that the background and the expertise of each of the contributors clearly shaped the range of themes in which they decided to focus on and the lens from which they approached them. For instance, Gavin Poynter, expert in economics of urban regeneration (Poynter and MacRury, 2009), shed light on issues connected with Management and organization, Legacy and sustainability, Governance, Urban development and Economics. Otto Schantz, author of widely known works on disability and sport (Schantz and Gilbert, 2001), placed his focus on Equality/ no discrimination. Deanna L. Binder, specialist in Olympic Education (Binder, 2007; Binder, 2012), devoted her text to the Olympic Values and Education and the Sports policy and sports participation fields. Figure 3. Major themes covered by the participant scholars and experts It is relevant to note that the 12 dominant themes highlighted by the Olympic Idea Nowadays (OIN) scholars are also dealt with by the 40 recommendations of Olympic Agenda 2020 (IOC, 2014b). Coincidentally, while the OIN individual scholars were working on their essays during early 2014, Olympic Agenda 2020 was being elaborated by 14 Working Groups, who synthesized debates and discussions from 1,200 ideas generated from the 40,000 submissions the IOC received from the public and stakeholders. The themes covered by the OIN project volunteer scholars are present in the recommendations of Olympic Agenda 2020 through the themes and keywords displayed by Figure 4. The themes are marked in bold while keywords are shown in regular font. 24 Olympic Idea Nowadays Figure 4. Correlation between the themes covered by OIN scholars and the major themes and keywords emerged from Olympic Agenda 2020 OIN ESSAYS Sports policy and sports participation Management and organization Governance Media and communications Legacy and sustainability Olympic values and education Economics Equality / no discrimination Marketing and sponsorship Urban development Problems and tensions concerning Olympism Politics THEMES OLYMPIC AGENDA 2020 Sports policy; sports participation. Support to athletes; sports lab/sports organization programmes Management; organization. Flexibility of Olympic Games management; bidding; Olympic programme; sport-based to event-based programme; relationships with other organizations, professional leagues and NGOs; maximize synergies with stakeholders; cooperation and networking; strategic partnerships; advocacy; Youth Olympic Games positioning Governance. Good governance; accountability; transparency; integrity; opposition to any form of corruption; IOC membership (age limit, targeted recruitment); IOC commissions composition Communications. Olympic channel Legacy; Sustainability. Lasting and dynamic legacy; post-Games monitoring of the Games legacy; sustainability strategy; sustainability in daily operations Olympic values and education. Spread Olympic values-based education; ethics; clean athletes; blend sport and culture Olympic Laurel (culture, education, development and peace); Sport for Hope; dialogue with society and within the Olympic Movement Economics. Size of the Games; cost reduction Equality; Gender equality; non-discrimination on sexual orientation Marketing; sponsorship. TOP sponsors’ engagement with NOCs and “Olympism in Action” programmes; global licensing programme; Olympic brand for non-commercial use Legacy; sustainability; bidding Education and awareness programmes and projects to solve existing problems (match-fixing, manipulation of competitions, related corruption, doping) Politics. Independent advice on political conditions Keywords regarding the first question: How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000? How do you think it will develop in the near future? The study rendered a total of 131 different keywords used by scholars to address this area. As it can be perceived from Figure 5, some of the most prevalent aspects highlighted by scholars to describe how the Olympic Movement has changed since Sydney 2000 include the growing emphasis on the “Legacy” of the Games, the challenges posed by the rising “Commercialization” or the “Increasing costs” of organizing and hosting the Olympic Games, issues that are also connected to “Gigantism”. The introduction and widespread acceptance of the “Youth Olympic Games” was also revealed as a central issue of discussion. The aforementioned terms were followed by another prominent element such as the “Governance reforms”, adopted by the IOC to tackle the late 1990s legitimacy crisis. As pointed out by scholars, those reforms allowed a higher degree of “Accountability” 25 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) and “Transparency”, even though some core challenges such as “Doping”, “Corruption” or “Betting” remain to be completely solved. Other remarkable aspects approached by scholars include “Sustainability”, “Decreasing bids”, “Gender Equality”, “Human rights”, “Olympic Values”, “Entertainment”, “Environmental issues”, “Leveraging”, “Olympic brand protection” and “Corporate sponsorship”, to list a few. Figure 5. Keywords used by scholars to describe how the Olympic Movement has changed since Sydney 2000 and how they think that it will develop in the near future. The following table presents the frequency of the main keywords highlighted by two or more authors to reflect on the first question: Figure 6. Frequency of keywords used by two or more scholars to describe how the Olympic Movement has changed since Sydney 2000 and how they think that it will develop in the near future. 26 Keyword N (authors) Keyword N (authors) Legacy 7 Accountability 2 Commercialization 4 Corporate sponsorship 2 Doping 4 Corruption 2 Increasing costs 4 Diversity 2 Youth Olympic Games 4 Entertainment 2 Betting 3 Environmental issues 2 Decreasing bids Gender equality 3 2 3 Leveraging Marketing Governance reforms 3 Olympic brand protection 2 Human rights 3 Organizational model 2 Olympic Values 3 Reforms 2 Sustainability 3 Transparency 2 2 Olympic Idea Nowadays Keywords regarding the second question: How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement? In total, 142 relevant keywords described scholars’ views on the ways in which London 2012 and Sochi 2014 Olympic Games supported or changed the Olympic Movement. As Figure 7 shows, some of the prevalent keywords revealed clear patterns of continuity and change regarding the first area of the study. The “Increasing costs” of staging the Olympic Games continued to be a major concern among scholars, as well as the growing “Commercialization” of the event. The fundamental importance of “Legacy” was another major issue that resonated throughout the essays. An emerging issue that posed threats to the Olympic Movement and its equity agenda was “homophobia”. The use of this term was connected to Russia’s government homophobic legislation and the organizers’ coldness with traditionally disfavoured groups, such as lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgender, intersex and queer (LGBTIQ). This form of discrimination, contrary to the Olympic Charter (IOC, 2014a), along with the human rights violations in the organization of the Sochi 2014 Winter Olympics, were spotlighted by several authors, including Kidd, DaCosta, Schantz and Torres. That situation contrasted with some of the terms used by scholars such as Todt and Chatziefstathiou to reflect on the positive milestones towards equality and no discrimination that London 2012 had promoted (“Sportswomen”, “Gender equality”, “Multiculturalism”). Moreover, the tensions between universalism in the Summer Olympics and the no universality in the Winter Olympics’ participation and appeal also came to the fore, as noted by Wallechinsky. Other prevalent issues that were discussed in this set of essays include “Governance”, “Olympic Values”, “Sustainability”, “Bids withdrawal”, “Commodification”, “Education”, “Nationalism”, “Urban regeneration”, “New Olympic sports”, “Youth Olympic Games” or “Grassroots participation”, among others. Figure 7. Keywords used by scholars to describe how London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement. 27 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) The following table presents the frequency of the main keywords highlighted by two or more authors to reflect on the second question: Figure 8. Frequency of keywords used by two or more scholars to describe how London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement. Keyword Homophobia Increasing costs N (authors) Keyword N (authors) 6 Environment 2 2 6 Gigantism Legacy 5 Grassroots participation 2 Sportswomen 5 Infrastructure 2 Commercialization 4 Multiculturalism 2 Gender equality 4 Nationalism 2 Governance Human rights 4 2 3 New Olympic sports Peace Olympic Values 3 Spectacularization 2 2 Sustainability 2 3 Temporary venues Bids withdrawal 2 Urban regeneration 2 Commodification 2 Youth Olympic Games 2 Education 2 Conclusion This introductory chapter has collected data from 43 essays written by international volunteer top scholars and experts with vast expertise on the Olympic Games. As previously indicated, the examination of those essays and the textual and visual representation of their content have allowed both researchers to highlight 12 prominent themes of contemporary discussion related to the Olympic Movement. As noted above, this overview has revealed Economics, Legacy and sustainability, Management and organization, Equality/ no discrimination, Governance, Problems and tensions concerning Olympism and Sports Policy – Sports participation as the centrepieces of the current academic debate in the field. Those dominant topics of inquiry are in clear correspondence with the themes emerged in the Olympic Agenda 2020 recommendations. In addition, the graphics have also contributed to raise the awareness of some of the main changes and positive advances in the past 15 years (IOC’s governance reforms, growing importance of legacy and sustainability, creation of the Youth Olympic Games, shift towards gender equality). They have also shed light on the on-going problems and current concerns within the Olympic Movement (commercialization, increasing costs, gigantism, doping, corruption, betting, decreasing bids, emphasis on the entertainment and spectacle, discrimination in Sochi 2014, no universality in the Winter Games). Those cornerstone elements of debate will be scrutinized in each of 28 Olympic Idea Nowadays the essays comprised in the Olympic Idea Nowadays e-book. Beyond this framework, it will be required to carefully monitor those lights and shadows in the forthcoming years, in order to continue tracking and discussing not only the evolution of the Olympic Movement but also the next-to-come reactions to Olympic Agenda 2020, which will be put into practice in the coming years. References Altheide, D.L. (1996). Qualitative media analysis. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage. Binder, D.L. (2007). Teaching Values. An Olympic Educational Toolkit. Lausanne: International Olympic Committee. Binder, D.L. (2012). “Olympic values education: evolution of a pedagogy”. Educational Review, 64(3): 275-302. Bryman, A. (2012). Social Research Methods. 4th Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dart, J. (2014). “Sports review: A content analysis of the International Review for the Sociology of Sport, the Journal of Sport and Social Issues and the Sociology of Sport Journal across 25 years”. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 49(6): 645-668. IOC (2014a). Olympic Charter. Lausanne: International http://www.olympic.org/Documents/olympic_charter_en.pdf Olympic Committee. IOC (2014b). Olympic Agenda 2020. 20+20 recommendations. Lausanne: International Olympic Committee. http://www.olympic.org/Documents/Olympic_Agenda_2020/Olympic_Agenda_2020-2020_Recommendations-ENG.pdf Marshall, C.; Rossman, G.B. (2011). Designing Qualitative Research. 5th Edition. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage. Poynter, G.; MacRury, I. (2009). Olympic Cities: 2012 and the Remaking of London. Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate Publishing Limited. Schantz, O.; Gilbert, K. (2001). “An ideal misconstrued newspaper coverage of the Atlanta Paralympic Games in France and Germany”. Sociology of Sport Journal, 18(1): 69-94. 29 Olympic Idea Nowadays How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000? 31 Olympic Idea Nowadays Excerpts from scholars and experts The following section includes the text from 21 scholars and experts reflecting on how the Olympic Movement has changed since Sydney 2000 and how it will develop in the near future. An excerpt from each expert’s contribution has been selected and is provided below. Bruce Kidd University of Toronto (Canada) Susan Brownell University of Missouri-St. Louis (USA) Nelson Todt Pontificia Universidade Catolica do Rio Grande do Sul (Brazil) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou Canterbury Christ Church University (UK) Panteion University of Social & Political Sciences (Greece) “The Olympic Movement has changed considerably since Sydney. Most of the IOC’s governance reforms initiated in 2000 have been successfully implemented for its own activities, although the scourges of corruption and unaccountable decision-making still remain in many NOCs and IFs.” “…challenge that the Olympic Games face in the future…perhaps the best that can be hoped for is that the media platform, including social media, will facilitate transnational debates on a variety of topics to a degree that was never possible before – but will the debates translate into action? The question for the IOC, Olympic organizers, and Olympic scholars is to ask ourselves what more we might be able to do with Olympic Games in these times. Are we really doing everything we can do to maximize their positive impact?“ “If the games are used for political reasons, the Olympic ideal is jeopardized. It should also be highlighted that with the huge media reach of the Olympic Movement in the last 14 years, other fronts of the society have taken advantage to raise questions about politics and society that the Olympism itself proposes to battle for. Therefore, the issue here is to not allow that the ideological dimension of the Olympic Movement covers reality. In a way or another, an event of great historical tradition must also be the catalyzer of changes, not only in sports” “What changed in the Olympic Movement in the past decade or so is a heightened concern for ‘sustainability’ and positive ‘legacies’ of the Games. When the term ‘sustainability’ first made its appearance in the world of sport was almost exclusively linked to the environment, but later its multiple dimensions (e.g. social, economic etc.) were recognised and emphasised in the context of the Olympic and Paralympic Games. Today the debates about leveraging and sustaining (positive) legacies from hosting the Games occupy a central space in the academic, policy and political debates surrounding the Olympics.” 33 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) Hai Ren Beijing Sport University (China) Hans Lenk Universität Karlsruhe (Germany) Veerle De Bosscher Vrije Universiteit Brussel (Belgium) Utrecht University (the Netherlands) Deanna L. Binder Royal Roads University (Canada) Otavio Tavares Universidade Federal do Espirito Santo (Brazil) Heather L. Reid Morningside College (USA) 34 “Autonomy and self-government of the IOC, IFs and other sport organizations had played a essential role to protect the Olympic movement from external interventions in a world full of various conflicts for a long period of time and successfully developed a unique world sports system relatively independent from the political control and commercial interferences. The Olympic marketing programs initiated in the 1980s have changed the situation. It is true that these programs set up a solid economic foundation for the Olympic movement but it is also true that they have brought a series of difficult issues to the Olympic and sport organizations, such as the illegal sport betting, sport violence, transnational organized crime, doping in sport, the manipulation of sport competitions and corruption,” “Indeed the global success of the Olympics and its movement in terms of worldwide acceptance and multi-compatibility with nearly all cultures is an effective asset to work on such an Olympic world ethos to be elaborated and disseminated as well as extended beyond the realm of sport. It is not by chance that the overall idea of fairness and respecting one’s competitor in rule-governed competition spread out as an exemplary ethical model towards other areas of social behavior and encounters (even in economics and politics).” “A follow up project in 15 countries is still in progress since 2011… First results confirm a continued ‘escalating global sporting arms race’. Funding increased in st almost every nation since the beginning of the 21 century, with the exception of Denmark, Estonia, Spain and Portugal, the latter of which the financial crisis can be a possible explanation. The rules of this race are dictated by what rival nations are doing, not on the basis of what an individual nation is doing now compared with what it did in the past. The key question facing all nations taking a strategic approach to elite sport is ‘to what extent do you wish to be part of this Game?’ ” “In sport as in life, values-based teaching, using these strategies, is intentional teaching. It is also a holistic and complex undertaking involving homes and families, community, schools, churches, the media and the state of ethics in the political and corporate life of the nation. Because of its prominence as an inspirational global event, and its educational mandate through the vision of the Olympic Charter, the Olympic Movement can make an ongoing contribution to this endeavour. The future of Olympic education should, therefore, be a valuesfocussed journey.” “In any case, the new power structure of the IOC made the institution necessarily more permeable to new influences and interests of international federations, sponsors and the media industry. One can observe a more concerned IOC with a number of important issues than before. The Olympic agenda firmly incorporated concerns with the righteousness of choice of the host cities, the size and the costs of organizing the Games and their sporting, economic and environmental legacies.” “One major change in the Olympic Movement of the new millennium is the demise of amateurism and the rising acceptance of commercialism. On the one hand, this change has improved the visibility and economic viability of the Games as well as the Movement’s larger goals. On the other hand, it feels as though something important has been lost and a corporate paradigm is taking over with little opposition. In the future, I hope we may find a way to revive the spirit that underpinned amateurism without losing the benefits of commercial support for the Games.” Olympic Idea Nowadays Cesar Torres The College of Brockport – State University of New York (USA) Holger Preuss Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz (Germany) Gavin Poynter University of East London (United Kingdom) Robert K. Barney University of Western Ontario (Canada) Vassil Girginov Brunel University (United Kingdom) Kyriaki Kaplanidou University of Florida (USA) “The Olympic movement’s alteration since Sydney 2000 is related to the reforms adopted as a consequence of the late 1990s legitimacy crisis. The volume of ameliorative measures as well as the swiftness of their implementation were unprecedented in the Olympic movement… Although many of the 50 recommendations for reform have been fully enacted, others have not been zealously embraced…Despite the ambiguities in its implementation, it seems reasonable to recognize that the Olympic reform process briskly introduced at the turn of the twenty-first century has had some positive outcomes.” “Since 1998 Olympic Games have been awarded to major cities only. Around 2000 the movement reached a gigantic size of the Games, so that only a limited number of cities remained that were able to bid for the Games. Even though since 2000 the growth of the Games regarding sports and athletes was stopped, there are other measures that keep increasing the size of the Games…However, overall the tendency of host city politicians using the Games to push urban development and justify the spending of taxpayers’ money is fuelling the perception of financial gigantism being needed to stage the Games.” “Sydney (2000) provided a turning point in the fortunes of the Olympic movement. A very successful Games shifted public perceptions about the IOC as an institution that had been tainted by allegations of corruption…The choice of candidate cities in which the winter Olympics should take place while Sydney also presented an example of a summer Games that largely managed the challenges of commercialism and the necessity to achieve sustainable and environmentally sound development relatively effectively.” “As long as the Games themselves remain as a supreme stage from which to make a statement or further a cause, they will remain in jeopardy of exploitation by individuals and groups bent on missions different than those championed by the Modern Olympic Movement itself. The overpowering expense of providing for the safety and regulation against exploitation in one form or another is spiraling upward so rapidly that many concerned are beginning to ask: ‘is the cost worth the product.’ At the point where the consensus answer is an emphatic ‘no’ the Games and its greater Olympic Movement will be in jeopardy of ceasing to exist.“ “The Olympic Movement has not changed substantially since the 2000 Sydney Games although a number of reforms designed to enhance its governance, transparency and accountability, as well as its relevance to modern society have been put in place. However, there has been one significant trend concerned with expanding the role of the Games as a vehicle for a wider social change, which started taking shape around 2000, and which is likely to dominate the Olympic Movement agenda in the foreseeable future.” “The Olympic movement has withstood the various “stress” tests coming from local host countries that are endorsed by the IOC through the host city selection process…The imminent change however is found in the economic ability of cities to bid for the Games in an unstable economic environment. If viewed through the lenses of the financially weak countries, the Olympic movement can suffer the impact of not being inclusive. In fact, the opposite: be quite selective and elitist.” 35 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) Otto Schantz Universität Koblenz-Landau, Koblenz (Germany) Benoit Seguin University of Ottawa (Canada) Lamartine DaCosta Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) Bill Mallon International Society of Olympic Historians 36 “During the Sydney Games 2000 the IPC and IOC decided to reinforce their collaboration…To improve the accessibility of mainstream sport through accommodation and adaptation of sports is the only way towards real inclusion without discrimination. All kinds of categorizing build up hierarchical, hegemonic structures and thus lead to marginalization in a sports model which values only the absolute best, the often quoted citius – altius – fortius. The fact of having two Games, one for the Olympians and one for the Paralympians, promotes an ableist view that considers the able-bodied as the norm of top level sports and neglects the diversity of human beings.” “Since Sydney, the focus on marketing and especially the IOC’s need to control everything around the Games (i.e. commercial environment, images on TV, athletes, viewing sites, etc.) have placed the emphasis on the big business and entertainment aspects of the Games. The large investments of sponsors and their need to show a return on investment is putting huge amount of pressures on the Movement….As such, I believe that the Olympic Movement has moved away from its educational mission and the promotion of Olympism. While the Olympic brand’s values are in line with Olympism, the actions of the Movement are often not in line with the values and consequently lack of authenticity.” “The Olympic Games presuppose claims of legitimation as the best choice to a better understanding of their mediations and interventions…This is particular true when taking into account the Sydney 2000 Games in which emerged a controversy related to environmental issues putting to risk the SOCOG before public opinion. The solution was to associate the local government to the NGO Greenpeace, creating a successful sharing management tool for environmental problems. This example highlights the leading role of environment issues as a means to provide legitimacy to the Olympic Games at least since Sydney 2000. The other subjects matter with similar potential meaning are gender equality and legacy issues as approached by the Olympic Games from 2000 to date.” “The International Olympic Committee (IOC) has had some unusual choices for host cities since 2000, however, with Athens in 2004 going to a nearly bankrupt country, Beijing in 2008 going to China, not unreasonable by itself, but a country that did not allow the media or visitors fully free speech or fully unfettered access to the Internet. Sochi in 2014 was a beautiful Olympic Games for the two weeks of the sporting events, but I suspect time will not look so kindly on the massive spending that went on in the Caucasus when many of the sports facilities lay fallow and unused in the years to come.” Olympic Idea Nowadays How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000? Bruce Kidd University of Toronto, Toronto (Canada) The Olympic Movement has changed considerably since Sydney. Most of the IOC’s governance reforms initiated in 2000 have been successfully implemented for its own activities, although the scourges of corruption and unaccountable decision-making still remain in many NOCs (National Olympic Committees) and IFs (International Federations). The Olympic and Winter Olympic Youth Games initiated by President Rogge have met with widespread acceptance, and the ways in which they require participants to engage in cultural and intercultural activities give hope that the IOC has not abandoned the pursuit of Olympism entirely. The Olympic Movement reaches virtually every national community in the world, with more NOCs (204) than the number of member countries in the United Nations (193); ‘the tent is full’. In 2009, the United Nations granted the IOC ‘observer status’ in recognition of its commitment to marshalling sport to the work of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Of course, these changes have been shaped by and shape the global social, political and economic dynamics within which the Olympic Movement is embedded. For example, the frightening and expensive systems for surveillance and security at recent Games (but not the Youth Games) have been necessitated by the violence and wars unleashed by 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq. Despite these successes, the Olympic Movement faces a number of difficult challenges going ahead. In addition to the familiar but elusive task of reducing the cost and size of the Games, it must address other issues that undermine its effectiveness and legitimacy. Here are two: Participation in sport and physical activity worldwide is falling, exacerbating the alarming increase in non-communicable diseases. While many of us long believed that 37 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) the Olympic Games can provide a powerful demonstration of Olympism and the benefits of sport, recent research demonstrates that ‘inspiration is not enough’. No matter how thrilling the excitement stimulated by outstanding performances or how many billions of people watch the Olympic telecasts, thrilling performances do not by themselves stimulate new opportunities or levels of participation. In fact, in many societies today, there is an inverse relationship between investments in high performance sport and actual levels of participation. SDP (Sport for Development and Peace) touches only a tiny fraction of the youth seeking such opportunities in poorer communities. If the Olympic Movement is really to create a ‘democracy of youth’ based on sport and physical activity, it must spearhead an entirely new level of broadly-based, sustained, intentional, informed investments and programming for ‘sport for all’. It cannot be left to chance. Despite its observer status at the UN, the Olympic Movement falls short of the international standard for human rights, as the prohibitions against free speech in Beijing and LGBTIQ (Lesbians Gays Bisexuals Transgender Intersex and Queer) in Sochi, among other examples, make clear. To ensure the full affirmation and protection of human rights, the IOC should • • • • • • 38 Revise the Olympic Program to ensure gender equality in the number of sports, disciplines and events in the Olympic and Winter Olympic Games and Youth Games. Add ‘sexual orientation’ to the anti-discrimination provisions of Principle 6 of the Olympic Charter. Uphold the right to gender self-identification by abolishing the unscientific and harmful ‘gender hyperandrogenism test’. Uphold free speech at the time of the Games. Require that all Olympic uniforms and equipment be manufactured according to transparently fair labour standards. Require that the construction and operation of all Olympic facilities are conducted under transparently fair labour conditions. Olympic Idea Nowadays How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000? Susan Brownell University of Missouri-St. Louis (USA) One of the notable contributions of the Sydney Olympics to Olympic history was the lesson learned by the environmental NGO (nongovernmental organization) Greenpeace, which managed to get a foot in the door with the Organizing Committee, and then received a great amount of media attention for its negative Olympic campaign. Since that time Greenpeace conducts a campaign around each Olympic Games, and it issues an “Olympics report card” afterward. Greenpeace’s relative success in getting its causes included in the IOC’s environmental initiatives inspired other NGOs, such as Human Rights Watch, which in 2008 began pressuring the IOC to include human rights in its selection of host cities. Thus, Sydney was, if not the beginning, then at least a significant landmark in the post-Cold War shift of Olympic politics away from national governments and toward NGOs and the U.N. system. Academic experts expect the influence of NGOs in global politics to continue expanding in the near future, so it is interesting to ask what this means for the future of the Olympic Movement. The IOC is, after all, also an NGO whose global influence seems to be growing. The major impact of this development is to shift a heavier burden into the arena of “communication,” which did not traditionally receive a great deal of attention from the IOC. The usefulness of the Olympic Games to NGOs lies in the media platform that they provide for publicizing their causes. Thus, they have become increasingly savvy about getting coverage of their reports, op-eds, press releases, and protests placed in major media. This has put pressure on the IOC to strengthen its own communications capacity. It has also distracted the audience away from the traditional Olympic values, as NGOs have set the agenda for discussion and the IOC is pushed into a reactive position. During the Cold War, the IOC could claim that it had brought hostile nations together on the playing field when they did not 39 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) otherwise interact, and that this was a great contribution to ensuring peace. The postCold War world order weakens this argument and forces the IOC to re-work its message for a new era. While the IOC did not enter the Beijing Olympics well-prepared for this new order, since that time it has improved its ability to get its message across. The Sochi 2014 Winter Games were Thomas Bach’s first Olympics as IOC President, and he was bolder about staking out the IOC’s place in global society than Jacques Rogge had been. At the closing ceremony, he seemed to directly confront the oppressors of the world when he said, "By living together under one roof in the Olympic Village you [the athletes] send a powerful message from Sochi to the world: the message of a society of peace, tolerance and respect. I appeal to everybody implicated in confrontation, oppression or violence: act on this Olympic message of dialogue and peace." It was only after the Beijing Olympic Games that the popularity of the social media sites Facebook and Twitter took off, so the London Olympics were the first “Twitter Olympics.” Social media now offer a channel through which the Olympic Games can stimulate real dialogue across national boundaries, and better fulfill their objective of strengthening mutual respect and international understanding. However, this potential is not currently being realized since, in fact, there is no department of the IOC or other organization specifically devoted to this task. While there is probably a great deal more transnational chatter about Olympic issues and sports performances on social media than there previously was in any other communication channels, it is not particularly directed toward achieving consensus on issues of global concern, or resolving contentious debates, or improving understanding between diverse cultures and religions. It might be questioned whether the media coverage and debate about Russia’s antigay law which was provoked by the Sochi Olympics had any concrete effects in the real world. This exemplifies the challenge that the Olympic Games face in the future. Perhaps the best that can be hoped for is that the media platform, including social media, will facilitate transnational debates on a variety of topics to a degree that was never possible before – but will the debates translate into action? The question for the IOC, Olympic organizers, and Olympic scholars is to ask ourselves what more we might be able to do with Olympic Games in these times. Are we really doing everything we can do to maximize their positive impact? 40 Olympic Idea Nowadays How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000? Nelson Todt Pontificia Universidade Catolica do Rio Grande do Sul Porto Alegre (Brazil) The historical tradition that states that the Olympic Games have not appeared for mere exhibition of superior athletic performance, but as a vehicle to the promotion of social and educational transformation, has eventually been followed up close by institutions of the modern world, making the Olympic Movement fit our times. However, the principles nailed down by Pierre of Coubertin should have their significance questioned in today’s world. Probably, Coubertin himself was the great defender of globalization, when he proposed the universalization of sport. Nowadays, these factors make the Olympic Games victim of their own success (paraphrasing JeanLoup Chapellet), generating endless dilemmas and contradictions. One of the recurrent themes in this subject is the dimension achieved by the political exploitation of the Olympic Games. As the International Olympic Committee (2007, p. 14) mentions: “The Olympic Games have the potential to be used as a propaganda tool and an instrument of political interests”. If the Games are used for political reasons, the Olympic ideal is jeopardized. It should be highlighted that with the huge media reach of the Olympic Movement in the last 14 years, other fronts of society have taken advantage to raise questions about politics and society that the Olympism itself proposes to battle for. Therefore, the issue here is not to allow the ideological dimension of the Olympic Movement to cover reality. In a way or another, an event of great historical tradition must also be the catalyzer of changes, not only in sports. It suffices to remember Sydney 2000, when South and North Korean delegations walked into the stadium together, under the same flag. In Athens 2004, the UN supported the IOC in requesting the nations of the world to stop 41 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) all wars during the Games. Despite the endless appeals towards the human rights theme, Beijing 2008 was an important step towards the opening of China to the world. On the other hand, London 2012 was the first edition of the Games in which all the countries had women athletes in their delegations. In this context, the theme dealing with the importance of peace should be brought into evidence, once the IOC established an International Olympic Truce Foundation in July 2000. Recently, in 2014, the International Olympic Committee and United Nations signed a historic agreement to share the same values of contributing to a better and peaceful world through sports. Heading into the direction of the goal established by the former president of the IOC, Jacques Rogge, in the 3rd World Conference on Women and Sport in 2004, which is to achieve equal participation in the numbers of female and male athletes in the Games, the Women and Sport Commission has gained an increasingly outstanding role in advising the IOC Executive Board on the policy to deploy in the area of promoting women in sport (International Olympic Committee, 2004). These initiatives seem to me to be in compliance with two items of the Mission and Role of the IOC to promote Olympism throughout the world and to lead the Olympic Movement, which follows (International Olympic Committee, 2013, p. 16): • to cooperate with competent public or private organizations and authorities in the endeavor to place sport at the service of humanity and thereby to promote peace; • to encourage and support the promotion of women in sport at all levels and in all structures with a view to implementing the principle of equality of men and women. Under these circumstances, since the Olympic Games 2000, there apparently has been an increase in the search of an ideal organizational model for the operation of the Olympic Movement. The orientation to be assumed in this case is proposed by Habermas (1993), to whom the legitimacy of the social rules must be evaluated by the acceptance of the situation of the ideal discourse. If this attitude does not prevail, there will not be conditions for an ideal discourse and this is what Olympism must battle against. References Habermas, Jurgen. 1993. Justification and Application. Massachusetts: MIT Press. International Olympic Committee. 2007. The Olympic Museum Document Set – Teachers. Lausanne: IOC. International Olympic Committee. 2004. New Strategies, New Commitments – Report of the III World Conference on Women and Sport. Lausanne: IOC. International Olympic Committee. 2013. Olympic Charter. Lausanne: IOC. 42 Olympic Idea Nowadays How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000? Dikaia Chatziefstathiou (Greece) Canterbury Christ Church University (UK) Panteion University of Social & Political Sciences (Greece) What changed in the Olympic Movement in the past decade or so is a heightened concern for ‘sustainability’ and positive ‘legacies’ of the Games. When the term ‘sustainability’ first made its appearance in the world of sport, it was almost exclusively linked to the environment, but later its multiple dimensions (e.g. social, economic etc.) were recognised and emphasised in the context of the Olympic and Paralympic Games. Today the debates about leveraging and sustaining (positive) legacies from hosting the Games occupy a central space in the academic, policy and political debates surrounding the Olympics. A significant development which has been somewhat underplayed in the media is the ending of the international torch relay and its replacement with a national one of a much smaller scale. This was decided after the 2008 Beijing Olympics and the severe disruption problems caused from protests against China’s poor human rights record. The major reason was to preserve the safety of the Olympics and of course not to spend huge funds for maintaining such safety during the long course of the international torch relay across the globe. What was broadcasted in London 2012 was the national torch relay which ‘conveniently’ projected images of ‘internationalism’, ‘multiculturalism’, and ‘diversity’ due to the rich multicultural elements of the city. However, what we witnessed was that some symbolisms of the Olympics can be compromised to some extent in modern times in the light of current challenges and possible future threats. The Olympic Movement is facing some key problems which I also addressed elsewhere (Chatziefstathiou and Henry, 2012): 43 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) 1) Betting and associated corruption. The former IOC President Jacque Rogge considered that it is posing as serious a threat as doping. The British Sports Minister Hugh Robertson agreed on that: "Up until this point, illegal betting has not been a huge problem at the Olympics," he said. "But it was difficult to monitor in Beijing, and this is a new threat and an evolving threat. 2) The impact of the financial crisis and current recession. On the one side we see cities withdrawing from bids (e.g. Rome for the 2020 Olympics), and on the other side nations from the BRIC economies (e.g. Russia, Brazil) or oil-rich nations (Qatar, Azerbaijan) to become (or want to become) the hosts (2015 European Olympic Games in Baku; Qatar 2016, 2020, and – possibly 2024 - Olympic bids). What we can foresee happening in the future is the submission of joint Olympic bids, something that is already welcomed by FIFA in football. Though such bid arrangement would imply fundamental changes in core aspects of the Games as inherited by their founder Pierre de Coubertin, it may be just another addition that compromises old symbolisms for the sake of current challenges. Finally, the IOC is now more involved with the new sector ‘Sport for Development and Peace (SDP)’. They have always proclaimed in their Charter that ‘sport is a human right’, but today they collaborate more closely with transnational bodies (e.g. the UN) and INGOs (such as the ‘Right to Play’) to help contribute to the achievement of UN goals and in particular the Millennium Development Goals through sport. However, as the examples of Beijing 2008 (Amnesty International’s campaigning for China’s poor human rights record) and Sochi 2014 (The International Lesbian and Gay Association for Russia’s gay rights record) have shown, Olympic sport is a site of analysis that is worth evaluating if there is any real mileage in such claims of ‘cosmopolitanism’ and ‘global citizenship’. In similar vein, the ‘ideal’ of the ‘Olympic Truce’, established in 1992 and backed by pre-Olympic UN resolutions since 1993, has been recently undermined and questioned by the Ukraine-Russia conflicts during the Sochi Games. References Chatziefstathiou, D. and Henry, I.P. (2012) “Managing the Olympic Experience: Challenges and Responses – Editorial comment”, European Sport Management Quarterly, Special Olympic Issue, pp. 1-3 [ISSN 1618-4742] 44 Olympic Idea Nowadays How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000? Hai Ren Beijing Sport University (China) Since the 2000 Sydney Olympic Games, one of the serious challenges faced by the Olympic Movement has been to maintain its independence and autonomy in a changed social environment. Autonomy and self-government of the IOC, IFs and other sport organizations had played an essential role to protect the Olympic Movement from external interventions in a world full of various conflicts for a long period of time and they have successfully developed a unique world sports system relatively independent from political control and commercial interferences. The Olympic marketing programs initiated in the 1980s have changed the situation. It is true that these programs set up a solid economic foundation for the Olympic Movement, but it is also true that they have brought a series of difficult issues to the Olympic and sport organizations, such as illegal sport betting, sport violence, transnational organized crime, doping in sport, the manipulation of sport competitions and corruption. Obviously to deal with the current Olympic issues needs a close cooperation among all parties related. Consequently, new, horizontal forms of networking relationships have emerged from the classic vertical channels of authority in [the] world sport. The IOC and other international sport organizations like the FIFA began to seek a new approach to cope with changed organizational environment and this approach is referred to as "good governance”. Good governance may mean different things to different organizations. The IOC, with other sport organizations, worked out “the Basic Universal Principles of Good Governance of the Olympic and Sports Movement” in 2008. 45 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) The process to reach Good Governance may result in various profound reforms in the Olympic Movement and the core issue concerned with the IOC and world sports is how to exercise their self-governance within the changed framework and to keep a delicate balance between governments, the Olympic Movement and sporting organizations. The Olympic Movement will be reshaped in trying to have a “harmonious relations with governments while preserving autonomy”. 46 Olympic Idea Nowadays How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000? Hans Lenk Universität Karlsruhe (Germany) In the last century, which includes Sydney 2000, the Olympic Movement turned out to be one of the most potent and most stable value-oriented international movements. The Olympic Movement, due to its multi-compatibility (Lenk, 1964, 19722), would be sure to get globally accepted as a guideline if proposed and worked out in modern balance and analytic scrutiny. Concerning the last approach and references, it is worth mentioning one of my past positionings: “I had tried to develop a multi-functional socio-philosophical value analysis of the Olympic idea as a set of values in a structure analysis also paying attention to conflicts and some dysfunctions. Most of these dysfunctions still occur today although progress has been notable within the Olympic Movement albeit less so in the overall public reactions including the international media. But there is a unison appreciation of the basic values and their capacity to serve as guidelines for athletes and sports (wo)men and even for education in general. We have to get more operational, address these intriguing problems of the Olympic and top level sports movement – in a pragmatic fashion, though always with outlooks and prospects of the basic value orientations never denying new variations of them. And yet: we are still in need of an elaborated and modernized Olympic philosophy!” Indeed the global success of the Olympics and its movement in terms of worldwide acceptance and multi-compatibility with nearly all cultures is an effective asset to work on such an Olympic world ethos to be elaborated and disseminated as well as extended beyond the realm of sport. It is not by chance that the overall idea of fairness and respecting one’s competitor in rule-governed competition spread out as an exemplary ethical model towards other areas of social behavior and encounters (even in economics and politics). Olympic sport at its best and according to its pure rules (if 47 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) the purity can be guaranteed in the future) can and will also henceforth set an example of competitive behavior for all humankind, if it stays abiding by the necessary rules (of course under operational checks and control). One might even speak (with Prof. Müller) of a certain kind of Olympic “world ethos” of sport that would climax in the Olympic value ethos and Olympic spirit. That ethos is and will remain very important, if the Games’ critical core problems like nationalistic exaggerations, commercialism, public and media pressure and the motivation for unfairness or even the now worldwide doping morass should be drained or held in check. These problems tend negatively to affect the traditional high appreciation of the Olympic values and their humanitarian image as a paragon for better humanity and education 1. Some of my earlier ideas as regards the global multi-acceptability and multicompatibility of the Olympic value system had not been officially acknowledged or even installed, but seemed to have indirectly played some atmospheric role affecting the overall positive attitude as regards globalization values and sustaining development ideas as well as mitigating the nationalistic overtones which are usually stressed by local or national press. In the last half century some promising changes have taken place (mainly in the Closing Ceremony regarding the party-like international intermingling march-in of the athletes), yet some substantial changes will have to be made still, in order to really use the potentialities of the Olympic worldwide attractiveness for a sort of global, if not visionary, reform or regeneration. There is a good deal of hope that with the explicit self-obligation of the new IOC President for maintenance, stability as well as a humane emphasis and extension of the Olympic values that the Olympic values may in the future be more effectively realized and operationalized. Despite and even because of the external success of the Olympic Games, it is necessary to develop a modernized Olympic philosophy of the values and “Save Olympic Spirit”. Further Reading H. L.: Values – Aims – Reality of the Modern Olympic Games. In: The International Olympic Academy: Fourth session August 1964, Olympia/Greece. Athens 1964, 205-211. H. L.: Werte – Ziele – Wirklichkeit der modernen Olympischen Spiele. Schorndorf/Germany 1964, 19722. H. L.: S.O.S.: Save Olympic Spirit: Toward a Social Philosophy of the Olympics. Ed. By M. Messing and N. Müller, Kassel: Agon 2012. 1 As an example, we might think of the festive mood and optimistic spirit dominating the first days of the 1972 Munich Games before the dreadful terrorist attack all of a sudden changed the high-minded Olympic world by catastrophic intrusion from outside. The problem of security would henceforth take center stage for all future Games. Indeed, the lesson is horrible but clear enough: Olympia is not situated outside of the world, but has, according to its high level ideas, to be defended in a modern form and secured as far as possible and feasible. 48 Olympic Idea Nowadays How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000? Veerle De Bosscher (Belgium) Vrije Universiteit Brussel (Belgium) and Utrecht University (the Netherlands) Change in elite sport investments with diminishing returns Over the past two decades, the power struggle between nations to win medals in major competitions, especially the Olympic Games has intensified. This has led to increasing competition in international sports with extensive investment by sports governments through funding and national lottery funding. As the supply of medals (success) remains essentially fixed (the IOC has indicated that it would like the number of events to be capped at around 300), and the demand for success is increasing (more nations taking part and more nations winning medals), the “market” has adjusted by raising the “price of success” (Shibli, 2003). This is evidenced by data from the SPLISS (Sports Policy factors Leading to International Sporting Success) study (De Bosscher, Bingham, Shibli, van Bottenburg, & De Knop, 2008), which showed from an international comparison in six nations (Canada, Belgium, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, United Kingdom) that expenditures on sport and elite sport increased considerably between 1999 and 2003, ranging from 30% in Norway to 90% in the Netherlands. Italy was the only exception in this regard, with a reduction in expenditure of 27% caused by falling sport gambling receipts in 2003. Interestingly, over the same time period, no nation in the sample improved its market share of medals from Sydney (2000) to Athens (2004). Canada was the only nation which maintained its performance. This finding suggested that as nations strive for success, there are diminishing returns on investment such that it is necessary to continue investing in sport simply to maintain existing performance levels (De Bosscher, 2008). A follow-up project in 15 countries is still in progress since 2011, involving 58 researchers, 33 policy makers, over 3000 elite athletes, 1300 coaches and 240 49 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) performance directors, known as SPLISS 2.0 (De Bosscher et al., in Press). First results confirm a continued ‘escalating global sporting arms race’. Funding increased in almost every nation since the beginning of the 21st century (see figures in appendix), with the exception of Denmark, Estonia, Spain and Portugal. The financial crisis can be a possible explanation in the case of Portugal. The rules of this race are dictated by what rival nations are doing, not on the basis of what an individual nation is doing now compared with what it did in the past. The key question facing all nations taking a strategic approach to elite sport is “to what extent do you wish to be part of this Game?” (De Bosscher et al., 2008, p134). Change in elite sport policy: increasing homogeneity with increasing diversity The global sporting arms race has encouraged nations to adopt a more strategic elite sport policy. Consequently, in their quest for international success in a globalizing world, the elite sport systems of leading nations have become increasingly homogeneous (e.g., Bergsgard, et al., 2007; De Bosscher et al., 2008; Digel, Burk, & Fahrner, 2006; Green & Houlihan, 2005; Houlihan & Green, 2008; Oakley & Green, 2001), with only small variations (Andersen & Ronglan, 2012). However, at a deeper level of policy decisions (and implementation), the SPLISS 2.0 study observed that nations respond with different blends of strong critical success factors. The study highlights that different countries create a competitive advantage just by developing a strength in one (or in a few) policy dimensions (pillars) over others. For example, Australia has the strongest level of development in scientific research (pillar 9) but scores below the average in international competition (pillar 8), while Japan has its strengths in Pillars 8 and 6 (training facilities) and Canada in coach development (pillar 7). The Netherlands had its relative strength in sports participation (pillar 3), talent development (pillar 4) and athletic career support (pillar 5). All these countries are relatively successful in the international arena. Another interesting key issue noted from the SPLISS project concerns the structure and organisation of elite sport policies. Clearly, those countries that have been identified as the most efficient nations given the resources at their disposal (input (funding) output (medals)) –are: Australia, Japan, the Netherlands (summer sports) and Canada, the Netherlands and Switzerland (winter sports) – also have the most integrated and coordinated approach to policy development (pillar 2). Finally, some other changes characterise elite sport policy development over the past decade as summarised below (De Bosscher et al., in press): - 50 Increasing prioritisation policies, where the resources are targeted on only a relatively small number of sports through identifying those that have a real chance Olympic Idea Nowadays of success at world level. All 15 countries of the SPLISS study prioritise their funding to mainly Olympic sports; except for France and South Korea, more than 40% of total elite sports funding is invested in eight sports or less, and for half of the nations this is four sports or less. - Increased government involvement and a “no compromise approach” taken by governments to provide funding but with strings attached in the form of agreed objectives and outputs that must be achieved to maintain the funding. In this respect modernised national governing bodies with a proven track record of delivery and positive future prospects operate within an environment of 'earned autonomy' in which there is an implicit understanding of the notions of sanction and reward. - Increased long-term planning of an athletic career, consequently leading to athletes starting ever younger with their sport, they train more hours, and more national and international championships are organized for younger age categories. Talent identification and development are increasingly seen as a specialist area within elite sport development systems; however, it should be noted that the level of development is still low compared to other elite sport policy areas. - Athletic career support is accepted as a common tool to influence success, with only little variation between nations. Athletes pursuing success in their sport are increasingly recognized as and treated as employees where resources to support the cost of doing business and the cost of maintaining a certain lifestyle funding for living and sporting costs are linked to reasonable living costs. - The increasing recognition of coaches as drivers of an effective elite sport system. Whereas at the beginning of this century the provisions for elite coaches seemed to be relatively immature (De Bosscher et al., 2008), the influence of access to world-class coaching, recognition of the coach profession and the professionalization of coaching careers have become widely accepted. As a net effect, the ease of worker migration and the increasing acceptance of ‘foreign’ coaches created a global market for elite coaches and performance directors. This is yet further evidence of an escalating global sporting arms race. - Scientific research has become a more important source of competitive advantage for elite sport development systems. This is further proof of nations taking a longterm strategic approach to achieving elite sporting success. From winning medals to … why winning medals? Society at large shares a widespread trust in the ‘good of sport and elite sport’. As one of today’s most visible social phenomena, sport is - to an increasing extent - associated 51 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) with a variety of personal and societal outcomes clearly exceeding the sport context. The Olympic Games are a strong example in this regard. Public spending on elite sport has been justified as providing a boost to the country’s economy, improved national identity and pride, international prestige and diplomatic recognition, personal development of talented people and the capacity to inspire increased mass participation in sport. But despite these high expectations, the cumulative evidence base for elite sport’s personal and societal impact remains very weak. They are described as storylines (Fischer, 2003, cited in Houlihan, Bloyce and Smith 2009, p. 5), and understood as an intrinsically “good” thing … framed in a positive, discursive nature allowing few possibilities for thinking otherwise’ (Green, 2004, p. 367). The question of why nations should care about winning medals, and therefore why they should invest in elite sport, the value of Olympic athletes remains unanswered … Answering these questions with evidence-based research may be source of inspiration for the future development of the Olympic Movement. References Andersen, S. S., & Ronglan, L. T. (2012). Nordic Elite Sport: Same Ambitions, Different Tracks: Copenhagen Business School Press. Bergsgard, N. A., Houlihan, B., Mangset, P., Nødland, S. I., & Rommetvedt, H. (2007). Sport Policy: A comparative analysis of stability and change. London, UK: Elsevier. De Bosscher, V., Bingham, J., Shibli, S., Van Bottenburg, M., & De Knop, P. (2008). The global Sporting Arms Race. An international comparative study on sports policy factors leading to international sporting success. Aachen: Meyer & Meyer. De Bosscher, V., Shibli, S., Westerbeek, H., Bottenburg, M., (in press). Winning the Gold war. An international comparison of the Sports Policy factors Leading to International Sporting Success in 15 nations (SPLISS-2.0). Digel, H., Burk, V., & Fahrner, M. (2006). High-performance sport. An international comparison (Vol. 9). Weilheim/Teck, Tubingen: Bräuer. Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing public policy : Discursive politics and deliberative practices: Discursive politics and deliberative practices: OUP Oxford. Green, M. (2004). Changing policy priorities for sport in England: the emergence of elite sport development as a key policy concern. Leisure Studies, 23(4), 365-385. Green, M., & Houlihan, B. (2005). Elite Sport Development. Policy learning and political priorities. New York: Routledge. Oakley, B., & Green, M. (2001). Still playing the game at arm's length? The selective reinvestment in British sport, 1995–2000. Managing Leisure, 6(2), 74-94. doi: 10.1080/13606710110039534 Shibli, S. (2003). Analysing performance at the Olympic Games: Beyond the final medal table. Paper presented at the 11th Congress of the European Association for Sport Management, Stockholm, Sweden. 52 Olympic Idea Nowadays Appendix Figure 1: Elite sport expenditures (x million euros) from government and lotteries by top 20 medal table countries (summer/winter), 2001‐2012. Data actualised for inflation (2012). The figure shows the percentage difference between 2011 and the earliest year where data was available Source: De Bosscher, V., Shibli, S., Westerbeek, H. & van Bottenburg, M. (2015). Successful elite sport policies. An international comparison of the Sports Policy factors Leading to International Sporting Success (SPLISS 2.0) in 15 nations. Aachen: Meyer & Meyer. 53 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) Figure 2: Elite sport expenditures (x million euros) government and lotteries by smaller countries. Data actualised for inflation (2012). The figure shows the percentage difference between 2011 and the earliest year where data was available Source: De Bosscher, V., Shibli, S., Westerbeek, H. & van Bottenburg, M. (2015). Successful elite sport policies. An international comparison of the Sports Policy factors Leading to International Sporting Success (SPLISS 2.0) in 15 nations. Aachen: Meyer & Meyer. Notes with the figures: 1. The data exclude the NOCs’ budgets; this is particularly important in Japan, where the JOC's additional budget spent on elite sport was around €44m in 2010; this information was not available over a longer period; 2. The peak in Brazil during 2007 is explained by the organisation of the Pan American Games, when the total elite sport expenditure was €193.693.066, mainly because of a government funding boost; 3. Switzerland’s 2008 budget excludes €33,6m in FOSPO expenditure on UEFA Euro 2008; the total elite sport expenditure was €82,2m; without this amount, the total expenditure increased over time; data 2001‐2007 are not comparable to 2008 because of other measurement methods 4. Canada is an estimation based on 80% elite sport expenditures and 20% sport (see earlier) 54 Olympic Idea Nowadays How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000? Deanna L. Binder Royal Roads University, Victoria (Canada) Fair play is never just caught; it has to be taught.” (Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport. 1995. Fair Play for Kids) Since the 1980s Olympic Education initiatives have gradually moved from a focus on knowledge about the Games to a focus on teaching the so-called “Olympic values” values that are inherent within the Fundamental Principles of the Olympic Charter. This focus presents pedagogical and methodological challenges for all four of the approaches to Olympic Education as described by Naul (2008). • the knowledge-oriented approach which “seeks to explain the Olympic idea by means of its historical and educational legacy” (118). This approach, which according to Naul, is the most widespread in the world, focuses on presenting information about the ancient and modern Games, may include excursions to Olympic sites, and emphasizes names, dates and facts. • the experiential approach which “employs encounters both inside and outside the school at games, sports, art and music festivals” (118). This approach emphasizes participation by children and youth in school “Olympic” festivals and competitions, international school cooperation and communication, and special emphasis on teaching fair play and cultural understanding. • the physical achievement through effort approach focuses on the idea that individual and social development occurs through intense efforts to improve oneself in physical endeavours and through competition with others (Gessman 2002 & 2010). Concentrated and systematic physical practicing and training offers a platform for the holistic development of mind, body and spirit. This approach situates Olympic Education in the physical education curriculum and in extracurricular and interschool sports. 55 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) • the lifeworld-oriented approach “links the Olympic principles to children’s and young people’s own social experience in sport with their experiences in other areas of their lives” (119). This approach interprets the Olympic ideals as a motivation for learning activities in all aspects of life, integrated with active participation in sport and physical activity. After Sydney 2000, the evolution of Olympic pedagogy with a focus on values and a lifeworld approach involved a sequence of projects that began with a question and ended with insight (Binder 2012). Briefly the sequence involved the following questions: 1. Do the Olympic Games and topics related to Olympism have relevance in educational contexts such as schools? As the Calgary 1988 Olympic Winter Games and subsequent Olympic Games (e.g. London 2012) educational initiatives have demonstrated that the answer to this question is “yes,” providing that the lessons, materials and activities support the curriculum outcomes of the ministries of education. 2. Are the Olympic values “universal values” as is stated in the Olympic Charter? Since the Pierre de Coubertin project of the late 1800s was a Eurocentric, patriarchal, somewhat aristocratic endeavour, this topic deserves serious consideration in a 21st Century multicultural world. An international classroom trial of “Be a Champion in Life” a teacher handbook project of the Foundation of Sport and Olympic Education prior to the Athens Games, seemed to provide a tentative “yes” response to this question. Five classroom teachers on five different continents (Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe, South America) who piloted materials and activities from the themes of Be A Champion in Life suggested that since the Olympic Games were such an inspirational global event, and since the Olympic values, as described in the proposed handbook seemed to support key objectives of schools and school systems in their countries, the materials were useful teaching tools. For example, in South Africa, the concept of “ubuntu” seemed to integrate well with the values of Olympism. A key insight from this study was that African and Asian teachers were uncomfortable with the activities in a “Pursuit of Excellence” theme that highlighted development of strong individual identities and goals – a feature of most Euro-American life skills programs. They were much more interested in the activities that promoted community responsibility and coherence. 3. What are the educational values of Olympism? There are many different ways to describe and define the values ascribed to the Olympic Movement. Every scholar, every National Olympic Committee and every seminar of the International Olympic Academy seems to have its own orientation to discussions of Olympic values. The following values were gleaned from the Olympic Charter to act as an educational 56 Olympic Idea Nowadays framework for Teaching Values: An Olympic Education Toolkit, the 2007 Olympic Values Education Program (OVEP) project of the International Olympic Committee. • Joy of effort - Young people develop and practise physical, behavioural and intellectual skills by challenging themselves and each other in physical activities, movement, games and sport. • Fair play - Fair play is a sport concept, but it is applied worldwide today in many different ways. Learning fair play behaviour in sport can lead to the development and reinforcement of fair play behaviour in the community and in life. • Respect for others - When young people who live in a multicultural world learn to accept and respect diversity and practise personal peaceful behaviour, they promote peace and international understanding. • Pursuit of excellence - A focus on excellence can help young people to make positive, healthy choices, and strive to become the best that they can be in whatever they do. • Balance between body, will and mind - Learning takes place in the whole body, not just in the mind. Physical literacy and learning through movement contributes to the development of both moral and intellectual learning. This concept became the foundation of Pierre de Coubertin’s interest in a revival of the Olympic Games. 4. How do young people learn values, and, from the answer to this question, how do we teach them? These are the pedagogical questions that were explored in the lead up to the development of Fair Play for Kids, a project of the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport (1995) and in the curriculum development process for “Be a Champion in Life” (2000) and Teaching Values (2007). These explorations provided the following insights about learning: 1. Learning is an active and not a passive activity. Learning processes include writing activities, discussion or debate, creative activities, e.g., art, drama or music, and physical movement through activities like sport, dance and physical education. 2. People learn in different ways. Some people learn best by reading; some learn best by listening; some learn best by creating things or moving around. Methods have to change in order to engage the attention of all learners. 3. Learning is both an individual and a cooperative activity. Some people work best independently. In order to learn and practice cooperation, however, people need to work together. 57 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) The following comments appear in the introduction to the Teaching Values toolkit (International Olympic Committee 2007, p. 10), and act as a summary for the understandings about curriculum development in Olympic values education that flowed from practice in the preceding projects. • • • In a world where obesity is a major concern, and where children in deprived communities need hope and a sense of achievement, physical activity and sport have an important role to play. The symbols and ceremonies, sports and cultural events of the Olympic Games are inspiring and motivational. They provide a relevant context for learning and teaching activities Exercises and stories based on Olympic themes provide a natural motivation for values-based teaching activities in a variety of subject areas. They will help young people to explore the traditions of their own national and cultural communities. They will support the goal of sport as well as the goal of education in schools to improve the moral and physical development of their participants and students. Stimulating the imagination of learners is another educational method used in Teaching Values. All athletes know the power of the imagination in helping them to accomplish a result or goal. Positive and creative use of the imagination can also help young people to develop new attitudes, new ways of thinking about themselves and others, and then to explore different ways of behaving. In her discussions on how to create caring schools, Nel Noddings (1988) describes four fundamental strategies for nurturing the ethical ideal: dialogue, practice, confirmation and modelling. In sport as in life, values-based teaching, using these strategies, is intentional teaching. It is also a holistic and complex undertaking involving homes and families, community, schools, churches, the media and the state of ethics in the political and corporate life of the nation. Because of its prominence as an inspirational global event, and its educational mandate through the vision of the Olympic Charter, the Olympic Movement can make an ongoing contribution to this endeavour. The future of Olympic education should, therefore, be a values-focussed journey. References Binder, D. 2012. Olympic values education: Evolution of a pedagogy. Educational Review, 64:3, 275-302. Naul, R. 2008. Olympic education. Aachen: Meyer & Meyer Verlag. Noddings, N. 1988. An ethic of caring and its implications for instructional arrangement. American Journal of Education, 96:2, 215-230. 58 Olympic Idea Nowadays How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000? Otávio Tavares Universidade Federal do Espirito Santo, Vitoria (Brazil) Some significant changes have occurred within the Olympic movement in the last 15 years. The first, and perhaps most important, refers to its structure of power and logic of governance in response to the bribery scandal of 1998 and the crisis of credibility that succeeded it. Based on principles of accountability, transparency and representativeness, the changes suggested by the IOC 2000 Commission turned the power system of the Olympic Movement into something more dynamic and open to the interests of its various stakeholders. They can have led however to unintended consequences. Observed retrospectively, the Olympic Movement is one of the few nineteenth-century internationalists’ institutions which have remained active and important to the present day. One reason for the resilience of the Olympic Movement has been its ability to adapt in some way to the context of its time balancing continuity and change and at the same time maintaining the characteristic which differed from other movements: be sustained in a humanistic vision and have the intention to perform it. This search for balance and eurhythmy has been present since Pierre de Coubertin’s days. To the Baron, the law of the pendulum applies to all. How this way of acting was planned or intuitive is still to be investigated. In any case, the new power structure of the IOC made the institution necessarily more permeable to new influences and interests of international federations, sponsors and the media industry. One can observe a more concerned IOC with a number of important issues than before. The Olympic agenda firmly incorporated concerns with the righteousness of choice of the host cities, the size and the costs of organizing the Games and their sporting, economic and environmental legacies. A policy of gender equality was implemented and fairly pursued. New efforts have been made to combat doping, and to promote a healthy lifestyle and sports practice among youngsters. The challenge of 59 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) fighting the 'aging' of the Games was faced with the creation of the Youth Olympic Games and through an intense debate about the definition of the Olympic program. On the other hand, this new power structure seems to have generated a different rationale of decisions, less truly connected with the values and principles of the Olympic Movement. Without a doubt it seems to be difficult to make choices and decisions for the sake of continuity in an individualistic world where hedonism, presentism, semblance and spectacle are significant driving forces and values are situated and relational. My hypothesis is that sooner or later the Olympic Movement will be in danger of losing its uniqueness as its values and principles were no longer any reference to the decisions taken. My view is that in this context, Pierre de Coubertin’s eclecticism and search for eurhythmy may continue to be cautious principle for the balance between contemporary demands and Olympics values, history and traditions. 60 Olympic Idea Nowadays How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000? Heather L. Reid Morningside College, Sioux City, Iowa (USA) “Amateurism is Dead: Long Live Amateurism” Since the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games one major change in the Olympic Movement has been the demise of amateurism and the rising acceptance of commercialism. On the one hand, this change has improved the visibility and economic viability of the Games as well as the Movement’s larger goals. On the other hand, it feels as though something important has been lost and a corporate paradigm is taking over with little opposition. In the future, I hope we may find a way to revive the spirit that underpinned amateurism without losing the benefits of commercial support for the Games. First let me explain what I mean by distinguishing the spirit of amateurism from its historical practice. Ancient Greek athletes were often highly paid and not at all averse to receiving lucrative prizes in various “money” games. But the Olympic Games prize of an olive crown was more valuable to them precisely because it lacked monetary value and therefore symbolized a higher, more divine calling than the practical need to earn a living. In short, the crown symbolized closeness to the gods, who have no needs and therefore can do things autotelically—completely for their own sake. Sport, at its best, is also autotelic—intrinsically rewarding with no need to be justified in terms of more practical benefits like fame, fortune, or even health. For the first century of the modern Olympic Games, there was an attempt to express this autotelic spirit through the idea of amateurism—the prohibition of earning monetary benefits from sport and the exclusion of anyone who used sport in this way. In practice, amateurism became a way of excluding poorer athletes and inaugurating a 61 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) shadow competition among individuals and nations in bending the rules to gain an advantage. These effects clearly undermined Olympic efforts to promote diversity and friendship. The removal of amateur restrictions and inclusion of professional athletes—along with support programs like Olympic Solidarity--seem to have helped the cause of diversity. In fact, the wealthy professional athletes who compete in the Olympics today may best represent the autotelic ideal of competing for the love of the sport rather than some expected practical reward. Capitalism seems more democratic—and therefore more Olympic--than the traditional social hierarchies familiar to the founders. The Games’ arrival in China and Brazil may be evidence of that. But Capitalism also tends to concentrate and maintain wealth in the hands of a few, reducing the possibility for the have-nots of the world to compete with the haves. The Games’ continued absence from Africa and the difficulty that poor countries have training and retaining Olympic athletes is evidence of that. Corporate sponsorship can promote Olympic values as TOP (The Olympic Partner Program) sponsors do so effectively in their advertising. However, corporate sponsorship can exacerbate the problem of economic disparity, as when BMW develops bobsled technology exclusively for the American team, leaving even their home country’s sleds behind. The point is that corporate sponsorship needs to work with and toward the amateur spirit—that is, the intrinsically valuable Olympic ideals. Capitalism has a natural tendency to favor those already advantaged—but it is a tendency we can and must counteract in the name of Olympism. 62 Olympic Idea Nowadays How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000? Cesar R. Torres (Argentina) The College of Brockport State University of New York (USA) At the twilight of the twentieth century, the Olympic movement was embroiled in a stunning legitimacy crisis. This crisis was initiated in late November 1998 with allegations of improper conduct by International Olympic Committee (IOC) members. The next month, the IOC commissioned an investigation. By March 1999 six members were expelled and ten others were warned (four had already resigned) while the IOC Ethics Commission and the IOC 2000 Commission were established. The latter’s charge was to examine the composition, structure, and organization of the IOC; its role; and the process by which cities are designated to host the Olympic Games. The IOC 2000 Commission offered 50 recommendations for reform, all of which were accepted by the IOC in its December 1999 Extraordinary Session. The Olympic movement’s alteration since Sydney 2000 is related to the reforms adopted as a consequence of the late 1990s legitimacy crisis. The volume of ameliorative measures as well as the swiftness of their implementation was unprecedented in the Olympic movement. The reforms modified the appointment and term of office of IOC members, established a mandatory retirement age of 70, expanded the executive board from 11 to 15 members, established new rules to designate the host cities of the Olympic Games, required that each bid city discloses the source of funding for bid expenditures, limited the number of events and athletes at the Olympic Games, among many other changes. Although many of the 50 recommendations for reform have been fully enacted, others have not been zealously embraced (e.g., the encouragement of National Olympic Committees and International Sport Federations to disclose their sources and uses of funds, and the revitalization of support for the International Olympic Academy and the National Olympic Academies). 63 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) Despite the ambiguities in its implementation, it seems reasonable to recognize that the Olympic reform process briskly introduced at the turn of the twenty-first century has had some positive outcomes. For instance, today, the Olympic movement’s constituencies are better represented in the IOC, the process by which cities are designated to host the Olympic Games is cleaner, and the IOC is overall a more responsive and accountable organization. Perhaps, this renewed dynamism led, in part, to the inauguration of the Youth Olympic Games in 2010. Having said all that, as some observers have indicated, much needs to be done to enact more completely the spirit that drove the reforms. Beyond the accomplishments and frustrations of the Olympic reform process, presumably the most pressing challenge to the Olympic movement relates to its foundational mission. The prevalence of practices underscored by a managerial logic focused on commercialization, entertainment, consumerism, and extravagance relegates the moral and social rationality that characterizes the Olympic movement to the periphery. In other words, the danger is that the global sport industry reduces the Olympic project to international sport competitions devoid of the moral and social import that are the raison d’être of the Olympic movement. Unless there is a purposeful commitment to consummate the moral and social goals of the Olympic movement, such goals will continue to be eroded by the managerial logic and its practices. The Olympic movement still holds much potential though to be a significant force at the service of lofty humanitarian aspirations. This can happen if its core values are not crowded out by the argot of branding and marketing that tends to incite and celebrate consumption and if Olympic governance is willing to be guided by and enact such core values. 64 Olympic Idea Nowadays How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000? Holger Preuss Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz (Germany) Since 1998 the Olympic Games have been awarded to major cities only. Around 2000 the Movement reached a gigantic size of the Games, so that only a limited number of cities that were able to bid for the Games remained. Even though the growth of the Games regarding sports and athletes has been halted since 2000, there have been other measures that have been increasing the size of the Games. Media representatives and corporate guests drive up the demand on general infrastructure. September 11th 2001 added giant security measures to the Games. However, overall the tendency of host city politicians using the Games to push urban development and justify the spending of taxpayers’ money is fuelling the perception of financial gigantism being needed to stage the Games. In this period the awarding of the Games has become more technocratic. However, in the end the whole professionalization of the bidding process did not take away the political dimension of the success of bidding. Eventually, (power) politics and networks decide on both the next host city as well as the sports program. Due to the nontransparent decisions about awarding the Games to Sochi, as well as about the decision to include Golf and Rugby or the in and out of Wrestling strengthened the public distrust towards the IOC and the Olympic Movement. With regards to nontransparent decisions in awarding major sport events (e.g. FIFA: Russia 2018, Qatar 2022; UEFA: Ukraine 2012) as well as corruption scandals, several International Sport Governing Bodies (ISGB) have lost reputation in recent years. The lack of good governance mixed with insufficient media work to explain the rationale behind decisions currently forms the rather negative image of the IOC. This and the obviously (subjectively) perceived increased contribution of taxpayers’ money ended in public 65 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) referendums in developed democratic countries voting against the staging of or rather bidding for events (Vienna, Roma, Graubünden, Munich, Stockholm and Oslo). Overall, I think that the awarding of the Games to Sochi and Rio de Janeiro fitted [in] the tendency to award mega-events to BRICS nations. However, BRICS and newly industrialised countries often do not have the governmental standard expected by the population of developed countries. Due to the Games shedding light on a location and its politics and policies, the media starts to report about situations in future host countries from an ethical and governmental level of a well-developed country. They also judge the preparation for the Games based on the values of the Olympic Movement, written in its fundamental principles. Not surprisingly, differences occur and lead to negative disconfirmation of expectations. While in the years following 1998 discussions were basically about corruption and aging in the IOC, nowadays the problems have increased. The governance inside the IOC gets criticised. In addition, there is also the expectation of the population that the IOC has to take responsibility for the entire production chain. In other words, the IOC has responsibility to ensure that the production of the Games follows at least some standard of human rights and democratic principles. Partly due to the self-imposed educational/pedagogical mission of the Olympic Movement (which thus distinguishes it from other major sport institutions), the Games are now inflated with diverse expectations. As these are oftentimes very unrealistic to achieve, there is currently a prevailing notion that the IOC fails to fulfil its responsibility. In the past decade the IOC has gained control over the finance and production of the Games (not the infrastructure). This control is almost entirely positive from the perspective of sport stakeholders (IOC, IFs, OCOGs) and their sponsors (corporations, media). It protects rights and reduces costs and opportunism as well as it ensures a high quality of the product “Olympic Games”. However, other stakeholders are severely disadvantaged by the IOC control. The government has to pass laws, guarantee public money or secure advertisement rights. The population enters monopolised market places, public space gets privatized and an overall gentrification displaces socially weak groups. So far, match fixing, betting and gene doping/new drugs do not seem to be serious threats but are upcoming challenges and to date it is not clear how the IOC is going to fight these issues. In the past decade the IOC could somewhat keep an image to stay in control over fair and equal competitions, although the feeling increases that the fight against doping is not really wanted and seriously addressed (e.g. non-use of frozen blood from 2004 and 2006). It seems that the IOC does not fight doping more seriously than the International Sport Federations do. However, given that the IOC endorses selected sports and has financial reserves, it could therefore do more in this fight. The popular perception that the athlete is not anymore in the centre of the Games, but commercial aspects are, does not appear to me. Sport builds the program and the 66 Olympic Idea Nowadays stories and creates demand (see the regularly occurring ticket scandals). The athletes live in almost perfect conditions in the Olympic Village and get perfect competition and training sites. Commercial expectations and some non-optimal competition schedules are certainly the price to pay for an athlete to be part of the Olympics, get reputation and perform in perfect competition sites in front of a world audience. In respect to the decreasing number of bids (or rather the growing public opposition against bidding for the Olympic Games, such as in Graubünden, Munich, Vienna and Stockholm), I think that the Olympic Movement led by the IOC should consider intensifying activities for the benefit of the host populations. It is also important to work on a better understanding of [in] which way they may benefit from the Olympic Games. 67 Olympic Idea Nowadays How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000? Gavin Poynter University of East London (United Kingdom) Sydney (2000) provided a turning point in the fortunes of the Olympic Movement. A very successful Games shifted public perceptions about the IOC as an institution that had been tainted by allegations of corruption over the choice of candidate cities in which the winter Olympics should take place while Sydney also presented an example of a summer Games that largely managed the challenges of commercialism and the necessity to achieve sustainable and environmentally sound development relatively effectively. Homebush was regenerated and, after a post-games hiatus, the Olympic Park took shape under the guidance of the Sydney Olympic Park Authority. Whilst the relatively small nation of Greece struggled to complete venues on time and to budget, the Games provided opportunities for infrastructure improvement in Athens. This achievement, however, was over-shadowed in subsequent years by the nation’s debt problems which were rapidly exacerbated by the on-set of the recession in the Eurozone and the failure to plan the legacy development of the event facilities. China’s spectacular Games announced the nation’s arrival as a major global economic and sporting power and encouraged rapidly emerging nations and their major cities to conceive of hosting the Olympics and other major sporting events as part of their transition to global status. It seemed that the extension of the IOC’s Olympian values to embrace the longer term sporting, socio-economic and cultural benefits to be derived in the post-event phase by host cities had been successfully institutionalised with the winter Games in Vancouver (2010) and, particularly, via the conceptualisation of legacy developed by London. London 2012 appeared to provide a compelling re-buff to those who criticised the modern version of the Games as a costly, highly commercialised ‘five ringed circus’. 69 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) But within months of the closing ceremony in London, events in the streets of cities in Brazil and Turkey demonstrated the capacity of ordinary citizens to contest ‘legacy’ – to contest the narrative that emphasised the long-term beneficial effects of hosting the Games; a narrative that had been so readily adopted, in the wake of London’s example, by the political and sporting elites in cities such as Rio de Janeiro and Istanbul. Legacy, and the positive socio-economic benefits it implied in its association with a mega-event, no longer provided the solution that served to legitimise the hosting of the world’s leading sporting festival, it became, at least for those citizens who protested in Brazil and Turkey, part of the problem. Over the recent period diverging trends have emerged. Rapidly developing cities in the east, middle-east and south have joined the race to host the Olympic and Paralympic Games whilst many other cities have noted the rising costs and social dislocation that hosting such an event is likely to cause and have withdrawn their candidatures. The new President of the IOC, Thomas Bach, has acknowledged these diverging trends and has announced a review - ‘Olympic Agenda 2020’. Perhaps the review should focus upon distinguishing elite sports participation from community-based initiatives to promote popular engagement with sports, with the Olympic Movement’s expertise being used to develop international projects that engage with the latter ‘365 days’ a year. The Olympic Movement should also recognise more explicitly the intangible benefits that may derive from hosting the Games and, in particular, reform the bidding process to enable host nations and cities to distribute events across enhanced but existing sports venues, with a greater proportion of events being accessible and free to the public. Whilst revenue streams may be curtailed or contained, the Games may achieve an improved balance between the commercial and the social; making it possible for new nations and cities to host the events within a framework of infrastructure improvement that is sensitive to local social needs and appropriate to their own scale and pace of planned development. 70 Olympic Idea Nowadays How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000? Robert K. Barney University of Western Ontario, London (Canada) Everyone remembers the Sydney Olympic Games in 2000 as that celebration which corrected the crass Olympic commercialism reflective of the Atlanta Games of 1996, produced a festival that made Australians proud benefactors of world-wide acclaim, and, perhaps above all, restored much of the image of the Modern Olympic Movement damaged immeasurably by the tawdry, indeed scandalous, events surrounding hosting bids made by Salt Lake City and its “sister” Olympic bid cities of the 1990s. How have the Olympic Movement and the Olympic Games changed since then? To begin, of course, one can identify the vast changes in the administrative structure of the International Olympic Committee, particularly with reference to issues of financial transparency, ethical behavior, prospective host city evaluation processes, and the demography of IOC membership itself pertinent to age and sporting constituency. In general, these changes have played prominent roles in restoring confidence in the Olympic Movement from the point of view of commercial sponsors worldwide, participating athletes, the huge global family of dedicated spectators (onsite and viewers by electronic means), and, finally, the thousands of volunteers who labor enthusiastically in the affairs of National Olympic Committees, National and International Sports Federations, and host city bid and organizing committees. But, despite those positive changes, danger lurks for the future of “matters Olympic.” The shrinking world, defined by the powers of globalization, is a dangerous place, and getting more so by the day. Political, religious, ethnic, environmental, indeed basic moral considerations, have all affected the Games and the Movement at one time or another. As long as the Games themselves remain as a supreme stage from which to make a statement or further a cause, they will remain in jeopardy of exploitation by 71 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) individuals and groups bent on missions different than those championed by the Modern Olympic Movement itself. The overpowering expense of providing for the safety and regulation against exploitation in one form or another is spiraling upward so rapidly that many concerned are beginning to ask: “is the cost worth the product.” At the point where the consensus answer is an emphatic “no,” the Games and its greater Olympic Movement will be in jeopardy of ceasing to exist. 72 Olympic Idea Nowadays How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000? Vassil Girginov (Bulgaria) Brunel University, London (United Kingdom) The Olympic Movement has not changed substantially since the 2000 Sydney Games although a number of reforms designed to enhance its governance, transparency and accountability, as well as its relevance to modern society have been put in place. However, there has been one significant trend concerned with expanding the role of the Games as a vehicle for a wider social change, which started taking shape around 2000, and which is likely to dominate the Olympic Movement agenda in the foreseeable future. The need to curb the uncontrolled growth of the Games with all its negative consequences coupled with the Olympic Movement’s mission (i.e., Olympism in Action) to promote a better world through sport urged the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and other stakeholders to develop a clear vision about the social, sporting and economic impacts of the Games. As a result, the IOC began framing the concept of ‘legacy’, which, together with the concept of ‘sustainable development’, has become an essential part of the IOC and the Organizing Committee of the Olympic Games (OCOG) policies, institutional arrangements and practices. The IOC, among other things, amended the Olympic Charter to include a particular reference to the creation of positive legacies from the Games and the promotion of sports for all in the host country. In addition, the IOC developed the Olympic Games Impact (OGI) project, which requires host cities to undertake a comprehensive longitudinal study designed to measure the economic, social and environmental impact of the Games. What followed from the conceptualisation and institutionalisation of Olympic legacies was a growing recognition that those legacies would not happen automatically as a result of hosting the Games, but need to be secured through a strategic approach to their planning. The 2012 London Games have made a compelling case for the need of 73 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) strategically leveraging the Olympics. What is more, the last two editions of the Summer and Winter Olympics – London 2012 and Sochi 2014 have marked an unintended but nonetheless significant departure from the traditional perception of the Games as a project bound by time and space. Due to their exceptional symbolic, political, social and economic powers, the notion of the Games, as an occurrence lasting for 17 days (time) has been extended to include the formal bid process (usually of about 2-3 years but much longer for some cities), the planning stage (of 7 years) and the post-Games period that has been marked with various anniversary events designed to keep the image of the event in public consciousness alive. In each of these three phases Games promoters have been deploying various strategies and techniques to leverage their powers by mobilizing an ever greater amount of resources and public energy. From this point of view mega events’ leveraging transcends the two defining characteristics of events – time and space - and offers to redress the balance between the egalitarian appeal of Olympic ideals and the Games’ elitist form of participation. Moreover, all editions of the Games since Sydney 2000 demonstrated that the mission of Olympism can only be delivered through a meaningful partnership between the public, non-profit and private sectors. This has made the IOC’s and Organising Committee of the Games’ insistence on separating the organisation of the Games, as a private matter, and their capital costs, as a public concern, hugely problematic and untenable. Similar separation may look reasonable from a logistical point of view, but it undermines the pursuit of the wider social objectives of Olympism. Thus, a major challenge for the Olympic Movement will be how to reconcile the need to run the Games effectively as a project while delivering the social mission of the Movement without privileging the interests of some groups over the interests of other. 74 Olympic Idea Nowadays How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000? Kyriaki Kaplanidou (Greece) University of Florida, Gainesville (USA) For many people in the world the Olympic Games is the largest and most significant mega sport event. Since 1896 with the first Modern Olympic Games in Athens Greece, the Olympic Movement has been subject to a number of negative impacts such as World Wars, boycotting, extreme commercialization and terrorist attacks. Since the Sydney Games, there has been a change in the Olympic Movement in order to maintain a thriving Olympic brand. Concepts such as legacy planning, increased safety, sport and the environment, and reform, have entered the propositions of bidding cities, usually in response to the IOC’s mandate or agenda for the Olympic Brand. The host cities after Sydney have dealt with a variety of problems that reflected positively and negatively on the Olympic Brand. For example, Athens had to manage the perceptions about delays in infrastructure construction and delivery, Beijing faced human rights challenges as well as criticisms about the environmental conditions of the host city. London faced some criticisms regarding availability of tickets and monitor transportation issues while Rio is under scrutiny for the ability to deliver on time with their venues. The Olympic Movement has withstood the various “stress” tests coming from local host countries that are endorsed by the IOC through the host city selection process. Thus, the values of Olympism communicated through inclusion, fair play, solidarity and friendship are not necessarily hurt long term by the challenges the host cities face. There is rather a short-term impact on the Olympic Movement, but not in terms of the Olympic values, rather in terms of the ability of the “adopted child (i.e., host city) to deliver on the promises they made. This is not going to change. It is bound culturally and socially within the host city that undertakes the herculean task of hosting the Games. 75 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) The imminent change, however, is found in the economic ability of cities to bid for the Games in an unstable economic environment. If viewed through the lenses of the financially weak countries, the Olympic Movement can suffer the impact of not being inclusive. In fact, the opposite: be quite selective and elitist. On the other hand, countries with more financial power could easily overcome the economic challenges and perhaps recover financially faster from hosting the Games. Given the global economic challenges, the awareness of potential host city residents becomes really skeptical about being in debt for the hosting of the noble Olympic Games. Thus, despite the Olympism values, pragmatism will provide a different platform for the evaluation of the Olympic Games and the Olympic Movement. With that said, the Olympic Movement needs to create a smaller, more manageable event that will reflect clearer the values of Olympism. 76 Olympic Idea Nowadays How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000? Otto Schantz Universität Koblenz-Landau (Germany) As an analysis of the recent evolution of the Olympic Movement and speculations on its perspectives for the future would largely exceed the space allocated, I will limit my reflections on the relations between the Olympic and the Paralympic Movements since Sydney 2000 in order to make some drastic and thought-provoking proposals for the future. During the Sydney Games 2000 the IPC (International Paralympic Committee) and IOC (International Olympic Committee) decided to reinforce their collaboration. The co-operation agreement that was signed the following year aimed to protect the organization of the Paralympics and to secure the “one bid, one city” principle, and at the same time it sealed the existence of two different Games. It seems that the Paralympic Movement has definitely given up its longtime cherished objective to integrate the Olympic Games. However, two separate Games risk to reinforce the separation between able-bodied athletes and those with disabilities; or, as Goggin and Newell argue, “the existence of a special event for people identified as having disability is a painful reminder of inequity and injustice, and its presence perpetuates the discourse of ‘special needs’ and ‘special events’ ”. The standards of play and performances in Paralympic sports will continue to be measured against the ‘norms’ of Olympic sports. Without fundamental change, there will always be the glamorous first class Games for the very best and then the second class Games for the brave Paralympians, who have overcome their “terrible fate”. In our sport-frenetic society physical prowess often becomes an indicator of a person’s value, not only in sport but also in other domains. By separating elite sport in a category for non-disabled and disabled sport we risk perpetuating the image of the less valuable disabled and as such to disempower the whole community of individuals with disabilities. 77 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) The UN-Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities of 2008 reaffirms that these people have human rights and that they should be able to enjoy them on an equal basis with non-disabled people. In most societies there is a strong political will to realize this convention and to include people with disabilities as much as possible. In this context of worldwide efforts towards inclusive societies, two Games, one for the able-bodied and one for the “disabled”, must be considered as an anachronism. Today the only social field, where exclusion still seems to be taken for granted, is the domain of top level sport. Will it one day be possible to demolish the last bastions of unequal treatment of persons with disabilities by rendering high level sport accessible for inclusive competitions? Top level athletes with disabilities, like Oscar Pistorius, the “fastest man on no legs”, need accessibility to able-bodied sport instead of discrimination and exclusion. If you ask Marla Runyan about her greatest success, she will most likely not mention her five Paralympic gold medals, but her 8th place in the 1500m finals of the Sydney Olympics. This could be achieved in many cases by accommodating certain sports to the need of people with disabilities. By changing the rules and/or the equipment some sports could be made accessible to athletes with disabilities (Schantz, 2001). New sports, which allow athletes with and without disabilities to compete side by side, should be included in the Olympic program. One example is the swimming events in Sydney 2000, where an optical signal was added to the acoustical departure signal in order to allow fair competition for a participating swimmer with deafness. Why not consider the wheelchair just like the bicycle as sports equipment? Wheelchair sports could be included as full medal sport, open for able-bodied athletes. The same could be done in the Winter Games. There are different examples of sports which could easily offer accessibility for people with disabilities, like powerlifting, shooting (archers are already allowed to compete in a sitting position), sailing, sled-skiing, or tandem cycling. To improve the accessibility of mainstream sport through accommodation and adaptation of sports is the only way towards real inclusion without discrimination. All kinds of categorizing build up hierarchical, hegemonic structures and thus lead to marginalization in a sports model which values only the absolute best, the often quoted citius – altius – fortius. The fact of having two Games, one for the Olympians and one for the Paralympians, promotes an ableist view that considers the able-bodied as the norm of top level sports and neglects the diversity of human beings. The IOC should give equal access to the Olympic Games to excellent athletes from the whole range of humankind without any discrimination in order to stick to its claim of universalism as stipulated in the Olympic Charter. The IOC can no longer exclude or discriminate an important part of humanity. The IPC should conserve and develop the Paralympic Games as a show case of the sporting culture for people with disabilities. It should develop the Paralympic Movement as an alternative sports culture which meets 78 Olympic Idea Nowadays the needs of all people with disabilities, but should keep integration and inclusion as its main objective. It should try to go its own way, in collaboration with other sport organizations, but should not try to copy the IOC. As a simple copy of the IOC it will always be second class (Schantz, 2001). Olympism and high-performance disabled sports are not contradictory. A real and successful inclusion of athletes with disabilities into the high level sports model of today, however, can only be realized by accessibility. This will be possible, if both, those who include and those who are included, make reciprocal efforts. References Goggin, G. & Newell, C. Disability in Australia. Exposing a social apartheid. Sydney: University of New South Wales Press, 2005, 81. Schantz, O. “Compatibility of Olympism and Paralympism: Ideal and reality” in Disabled Sport: Competition and Paralympic Games. Proceedings of the IVth Olympic Forum Barcelona, November 2001, CD ed. Barcelona Olympic Foundation, 2001). 79 Olympic Idea Nowadays How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000? Benoit Seguin University of Ottawa (Canada) The Sydney 2000 Olympic Games was a fantastic sporting event and its impact on the Olympic Movement was noteworthy. This was no easy feat given that in the years preceding the Games, the Olympic Movement was plagued with some of the worst scandals in its history. Indeed, corruption, politics and issues such as doping and overcommercialization tarnished the Olympic brand. But Sydney’s commitment to making the Games the ‘athletes’ Games’ greatly contributed to its success. The Olympic values came to life throughout the Games with numerous displays of friendship, unity, excellence and fair play. The Opening Ceremonies were strong in emotions and symbols as North Korea and South Korea walked in as a unified team and the lighting of the flame by aboriginal athlete Kathy Freeman symbolized Australia’s efforts at reconciliation with its aboriginal population. Australia’s love for sports was clearly shown throughout the Games and enhanced the exceptional athletic performances of the likes of Cathy Freeman, Ian Thorpe and Steve Redgrave. To me, the successful marketing of the 2000 Olympic Games was perhaps its most significant contribution to the Olympic Movement. While I was not in Sydney during the Games, the superb images that came out of Sydney prior to and during the Games, the distinct branding of the sport venues, the genuine enthusiasm of the spectators and the creative activation of sponsors contributed to its success. In addition, the Sydney Olympics came at a time when the IOC was in the early stages of developing its brand (Olympic brand). I believe that the Olympic brand greatly benefited from Sydney (and brand Australia), which contributed to establishing the Olympic brand as one of the most powerful brands in sports. Sydney was also one of the first Organizing Committees to pass a legislation aimed at protecting the Olympic brand against ambush marketing. This was the first step towards anti-ambush marketing legislation and institutionalized brand 81 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) protection within the Olympic Movement. The marketing success of Sydney and its contribution to Olympic brand definitely increased the interest of sponsors and broadcasters around the world and as such helped secure the financial wellbeing of the entire Movement. Since Sydney, the focus on marketing and especially the IOC’s need to control everything around the Games (i.e. commercial environment, images on TV, athletes, viewing sites, etc.) have placed the emphasis on the big business and entertainment aspects of the Games. The large investments of sponsors and their need to show a return on investment are putting a huge amount of pressure on the Movement. In such an environment, the competition is FIFA World Cup, NFL Super Bowl, EURO, and any other large sport properties that may take away from the commercial value of the Games. As such, I believe that the Olympic Movement has moved away from its educational mission and the promotion of Olympism. While the Olympic brand’s values are in line with Olympism, the actions of the Movement are often not in line with the values and consequently lack of authenticity. Is the educational mission of the Movement to create ‘Olympic fans’ or to build a better world through sports by building a better world through sport? The question merits to be asked as many educational programs of NOCs are under the supervision of marketing directors. Sydney’s inclusion of legacies within the bid and planning stages and its governance mechanism were also a contribution and have provided hosts with lessons regarding legacy. The concept of ‘leveraging’ the Games for tourism is also tied to legacy and was an important aspect of the Sydney 2000 Games. While this concept was relatively new in Sydney, many hosts are now using leveraging to maximize impact of hosting Olympic Games. This is likely to continue given the large investments made by cities to host the Games. The business model of hosting the Games is likely to be reviewed because of the costs of the Games. It will also be interesting to follow new events such as the Youth Olympic Games (YOG) and whether the impacts on youth and on Olympic brand are positive. Are the YOG contributing to get young people engaged in sports? Fighting obesity? New sports and events are likely to continue as the Olympic brand must reinvent itself and stay relevant to young people. 82 Olympic Idea Nowadays How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000? Lamartine DaCosta Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) The complexity of many approaches from different areas of knowledge that characterizes the Olympic Games presupposes claims of legitimation as the best choice to a better understanding of their mediations and interventions. Surely the legitimacy function of the Olympic Games permeates most of the IOC actions at present times (DaCosta, 2013). And in this regard the process of legitimation of the Olympic Games might be the way that makes them acceptable to stakeholders such as OCOGs, IFs and NOCs besides media, governments and the general public. Consequently, legitimacy is here proposed to operate as a train of thought to be argued about by the Olympic Movement at present and in future circumstances. This is particularly true when we take into account the Sydney 2000 Games, in which a controversy related to environmental issues putting to risk the SOCOG emerged before public opinion. The solution was to associate the local government to the NGO Greenpeace, creating a successful sharing management tool for environmental problems. This example highlights the leading role of environment issues as a means to provide legitimacy to the Olympic Games at least since Sydney 2000. The other subject matters with similar potential meaning are gender equality and legacy issues as approached by the Olympic Games from 2000 to date. Actually, environmental protection has become a managerial proactive attitude displayed outwardly by the IOC since the beginning of the 1990s and has been kept into improvement up to today, including respective changes in the Olympic Charter. In this sense the concept of sustainability has been brought into conformity among OCOGs after Sydney without rejections, but with different degrees of efficiency. Anyway sustainable Games are here to stay and to provide legitimation to most interventions to be made in the future by the IOC and its partner organizations. 83 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) On the other hand, gender inequality and the lack of recognition of human rights as exemplified by homophobia in Sochi 2014 are still today beyond the control of the IOC and OCOGs despite isolated proactive initiatives in recent years. Thus far, the legitimacy of Olympic Games facing the problems of diversity and alterity is at risk for future management demands. The legacies from the Olympic Games in order to change a city, a region and even a nation are today a fundamental commitment of the Olympic Movement at least on account of its leaders’ discourse. However, the so expected environmental, social and economic legacies since Sydney 2000 have not yet brought up a commonly accepted method of measuring the impacts of all legacy variables. In this concern, I proposed after London 2012 the conception of legacy as a partial planning related to OCOGs, being the post-Games completion of these results an ongoing process under the responsibility of the host city government (DaCosta, 2013). Presumably this new approach will give ground to guarantee legacy as the main legitimation means of the Olympic Games as envisioned by their stakeholders. References DaCosta, Lamartine (2013) Future Mega-events Cities. Paper presented at the “Olympic Legacies: International Conference Impacts of Mega-Events on Cities” 4-6 September 2013, University of East London. 84 Olympic Idea Nowadays How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000? Bill Mallon (USA) International Society of Olympic Historians When I left Sydney in October 2000, I thought I had seen the quintessential Summer Olympic Games and could not imagine that the Games could be any better. I know many veteran Olympic-goers who echoed my thoughts, but a few of them have not told me they thought London in 2012 was even better. I will demur on that vote, and probably choose them equal #1 as the greatest ever Summer Olympics. It would be difficult to imagine any cities doing any better. The International Olympic Committee (IOC) has had some unusual choices for host cities since 2000, however, with Athens in 2004 going to a nearly bankrupt country, Beijing in 2008 going to China, not unreasonable by itself, but a country that did not allow the media or visitors fully free speech or fully unfettered access to the Internet. Sochi in 2014 was a beautiful Olympic Games for the two weeks of the sporting events, but I suspect time will not look so kindly on the massive spending that went on in the Caucasus when many of the sports facilities lay fallow and unused in the years to come. Going along with these choices, FIFA chose Qatar to host the 2022 World Cup, a choice that has been severely criticized because of the heat in that nation during the summer, the need to build multi-billion dollar air conditioned stadia, the allegations that Qatar bribed officials to win that bid, and the human rights scandal that goes on as Qatar imports workers from third-world nations, with close to 1,000 of them having died during the construction processes. In addition, Hanoi recently turned down the opportunity to host the Asian Games, citing the excess costs of those Games. International sporting events are becoming very expensive propositions and cities are realizing this more and more and asking if they are worth it. 85 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) The numbers that are out there are costs of $44 billion (US) for Beijing in 2008 and $51 billion (US) for Sochi in 2014. While those numbers include both operating and infrastructural costs, those are the numbers that people see, and that prospective host cities see, and it is beginning to frighten them off. The IOC must be concerned about this, especially in light of developments for the right to host the 2022 Olympic Winter Games. Five cities remain, but Krakow, Poland may opt out in a forthcoming referendum, while Lviv, Ukraine, is in desperate straits because of the political situation in that country. Recently Norway’s citizens, and one of its ruling political parties, have voiced concern about Oslo remaining as a potential host city, and this has caused new IOC President Thomas Bach to join his 2022 Coordination Commission on a trip to Oslo to meet with political leaders in Oslo and Norway, and this is in the home of Winter Sports. It is possible only two cities may remain for the final bid, both Asian – Almaty, Kazakhstan and Beijing, China – and with the Olympic Movement historically a Eurocentric organization, this cannot be good news to the IOC. Fortunately, there has been enough publicity about this that the IOC realizes this is a major problem. Even the bidding for an Olympic Games has been rumored to approach $100 million (US) in costs. President Bach has stated as one of his goals to make bidding for, and hosting, Olympic Games and Olympic Winter Games, more fiscally responsible. He has proposed a new Olympic summit this December, the Olympic Agenda 2020, at which hopefully the IOC Members will place such fiscal reasonability high for bid and host cities on their lists. So I would expect in the coming years that Olympic host cities will be asked to stop the “arms race” of bigger, better, and more expensive stadia and facilities, and to build reasonable projects, all with an eye to their legacy and how they will be used in the future, after the Games have ended. If this is not done, then fewer and fewer cities will want, or even be able, to host an Olympic Games. 86 Olympic Idea Nowadays How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement? 87 Olympic Idea Nowadays Excerpts from scholars and experts The following section includes the text from 23 scholars and experts reflecting on how the Olympic Games in London 2012 and Sochi 2012 have supported or changed the Olympic Movement. An excerpt from each expert’s contribution has been selected and is provided below. Bruce Kidd University of Toronto (Canada) Susan Brownell University of Missouri-St. Louis (USA) Nelson Todt Pontificia Universidade Catolica do Rio Grande do Sul (Brazil) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou Canterbury Christ Church University (UK) Panteion University of Social & Political Sciences (Greece) Hai Ren Beijing Sport University (China) “Although sport can be an engrossing, richly rewarding cultural practice in its own right, Olympic sport should be a means to the realization of Olympism and not an end in itself.” “Something significant is happening in the global political economy, and the Olympic Games are a bellwether. It is probably not so much that London 2012 or Sochi 2014 changed the Olympic movement. At a minimum, they reflected larger global economic and political trends; at a maximum, they pushed these trends forward.” “London promoted the "Get Set for the Olympic Truce"…and another slogan from Sochi "Russia – Great. New. Open."… these initiatives might be mixed up with hidden political interests, still, they gain importance by the proportion at which they gain grace when technology brings the games within reach.” “As I have demonstrated in previous work, the Olympic movement is not constant but the discourses of its overt and covert ideological constructions keep shifting. Such discursive and non-discursive practices have also been paradoxical and contradictory at times, e.g. internationalism vs. nationalism; universalism vs. multiculturalism etc.” “Obviously, without participation of youth the Olympic Movement would lose all legitimate reasons for its existent. Youth is crucial to the Olympic Movement. But various investigations in recent years seem to suggest that the attitude of youth towards the Olympic Games is getting less enthusiastic and Olympics being watched more by older viewers.” 89 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) Hans Lenk Universität Karlsruhe (Germany) Veerle De Bosscher Vrije Universiteit Brussel (Belgium) Utrecht University (the Netherlands) Deanna L. Binder Royal Roads University (Canada) Otavio Tavares Universidade Federal do Espirito Santo (Brazil) Heather L. Reid Morningside College (USA) Jean-Loup Chappelet Swiss Graduate School of Public Administration (IDHEAP) of the University of Lausanne (Switzerland). Cesar Torres The College of Brockport – State University of New York (USA) 90 “The IOC should use even political conditions and measures in a wise manner to save this independence and neutrality of the Games – especially in awarding the future Games to cities and the respective countries – even by considering already in advance some international critical developments, demonstrations or internal dangers for staging and organizing the Games (if difficulties could possibly be predicted). Also, a possible easier financing the Games by very autocratic regimes does not seem to be always a “wise” decision.” “The question of why nations should care about winning medals, and therefore why they should invest in elite sport, the value of Olympic athletes remains unanswered … Answering these questions with evidence based research may be source of inspiration for the future development of the Olympic movement.” “We look to Rio (2016) and Pyeongchang (2018) to further enhance the valuesbased legacies of hosting an Olympic Games. Understanding the pedagogy and psychology of values education can offer strategies for assuring the achievement of those legacies.” “One could say London 2012 and Sochi 2014 can be seen as the latest manifestation of a growing trend of commodification and spectacularization of the Olympic Games. It seems that both trends should be considered as threats to the continuity of the Movement because their advance jeopardizes the recognition of his humanistic self-defined mission.” “It must be recognized that fair play and the Olympic spirit more broadly are not things that can be reduced to rules… An ethos just is a value shared by a community and the way to foster such values is by celebrating them publically while deriding their opposites.” “Today, the spirit of competition between cities and countries or athletes that the Games promotes has weakened. People still enjoy peaceful contests between nations, but their fervor has waned. In Europe, people at the grass-roots level of sport are abandoning sport clubs where competition is a prime motivator, preferring to do their sport individually or in popular mass-participation events. At the Olympics, on the other hand, it often is no longer taking part that counts, but winning (sometimes at any price, even if that means doping or cheating).” “Neither London 2012 nor Sochi 2014 seems to have significantly changed the Olympic Movement. In some respect, both events could be seen as continuing, and some would argue deepening, the confluence of transnational corporations and global media at the Olympic Games that started to gain momentum in the 1980s. This confluence has led to the increasing commercialization, branding, marketing, and spectacularization of the Olympic Games”. Olympic Idea Nowadays Holger Preuss Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz (Germany) Gavin Poynter University of East London (United Kingdom) Robert K. Barney University of Western Ontario (Canada) David Wallechinsky President of the International Society of Olympic Historians. Vassil Girginov Brunel University (United Kingdom) Kyriaki Kaplanidou University of Florida (USA) Otto Schantz Universität Koblenz-Landau, Koblenz (Germany) “The right-holding media companies do not want to spoil their product and therefore whenever the sport program at the Games starts, negative reporting ends. It was good for the Movement and Sochi that sport entered the overall negative pre-Games news.” “London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported the Olympic movement but in so doing also revealed the necessity for change. The Olympic movement represents more than its institutional forms (the IOC, international and national sports federations) and has sought to protect and project its values in a global setting in which the sports industry has rapidly expanded and the role of sport within societies has changed.” “When one reflects back on the most recent editions of the Olympic Games, the Summer Festival in London, and the Winter Games of Sochi, one is invariably pulled in opposite directions, one expressing admiration, another underscored by dismay. One hopes that “admirable outcomes” will be continued, and that ‘dismay connotations’ will be corrected.“ “At the London 2012 Games the sensitive topic of race was not an issue when one considers medal-winning success. But the Sochi Winter Games were a different story. Although about 17% of the world’s population would probably self-identify as “white” or “Caucasian,” at the 2014 Winter Games, 93% of the medal winners were white. Clearly, when one considers participation, whether at an elite or nonelite level, the Winter Olympics do not have the universal appeal of the Summer Olympics.” “London established four high compelling expectations meaning that no Games can be hold in the future without: (i) explicitly framing their developmental visions for wider social change that goes beyond the field of sport; (ii) fully integrating the notion of sustainability in all aspects of the Games planning and implementation operations; (iii) putting in place a governance model that will guarantee the balance of the global and local agendas; and (iv)developing a sound and longterm strategy for Games legacy.” “Conceptually, legacy relates to sustainability of positive outcomes. In that sense, it connects directly with the Olympic movement because sustainability is a key value for the Olympic movement, which the London Games reinforced startfurther.” “The Games 2012 and 2014 where milestones concerning the participation of women, the Pistorius case during the London Games and the context of homophobia in Sochi raised new issues of diversity and alterity. Sochi questioned, once again, the attitude of the IOC against human rights violations in host countries and the case of Pistorius challenged the traditional categorizing system in sports. These concerns opened a new debate about today’s relevance and meanings of sports in open and inclusive societies.” 91 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) Benoit Seguin University of Ottawa (Canada) Lamartine DaCosta Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) Bill Mallon International Society of Olympic Historians Ana Miragaya Universidade Estacio de Sa, Petropolis (Brazil) 92 “The negative publicity resulting from anti-ambush efforts in London brought public attention to an issue that is linked to commercialization and may be causing more damage to the Olympic brand than good. Similarly, the IOC’s strict control and enforcement over the athletes participating in the Sochi’s Games (e.g. Rule 40) created resentment from many athletes and also brought negative publicity to the Games.” “Legitimacy is the synthesis of the search of the IOC towards the continuation of Olympic Games’ existence and development and in this concern London 2012 and Sochi 2014 were mostly a test to IOC’s legitimation at present times. For the future Olympic Games at 2016 in Rio de Janeiro there will be an “acid” test taking into account the growing public opposition to sport mega-events.” “London 2012 took place between Beijing 2008 and Sochi 2014 and, along with Vancouver 2010, helped restore some sanity to host cities’ tendencies to spend more and more money, with no regard to the legacy of structures being built or what would become of them. The economics of an Olympic Games are always difficult to fathom fully, because there are both operating costs and the infrastructural costs that cities undertake on projects they hope to subsume within the Olympic finances. “Neither London 2012 nor Sochi 2014 supported the Olympic Movement as these Games have not brought forward the values of Olympism mentioned in the Olympic Charter or even contributed to the education of the youth worldwide. On the contrary, both editions of the Games have continued to reinforce the already long tradition of making supersized Games with many thousands of athletes, which need billionaire investments in infrastructure and facilities that may become useless to citizens, complex and expensive security systems, costly marketing development, fierce competition for medal count, more technically sophisticated doping tests, more hours of transmission, greater number of sponsors not at all related to sport or education, use of the Games for political purposes among many undesirable features which render the host city and country a deficient Olympic legacy. The Olympic Games have become indeed a very big business.” Olympic Idea Nowadays How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement? Bruce Kidd University of Toronto, Toronto (Canada) Both London and Sochi presented ambitious Games, transforming the landscape with massive new Olympic Parks, new sports and recreation facilities, and other major infrastructural investments; conducting well organized events and winning worldwide media coverage for the dazzling competitions and inspirational athletes they enabled. Both Olympic Parks demonstrate the opportunities the Olympics provide for a scale of urban renewal that is rarely possible without the revenues, deadlines, and international spotlight of a mega-event. In London’s case, the organizers cleaned up and redesigned 560 acres of deeply polluted industrial land and waterways, an achievement that every major city in the world watched with envy. Sochi created a brand-new winter sport resort. Since the long-term economic, social and environmental benefits of these investments will not be borne out for years, even decades, both merit continuing attention, but they provide a clear case of the potential the Olympics provide for urban regeneration and nation-building. London made two exemplary contributions to the equity agenda of the Olympic Movement. The organizers worked with the IOC to ensure that there were competitive opportunities for women in every sport, that every National Olympic Committee made an effort to send female competitors to the Games, and that traditionally marginalized or excluded groups, especially lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgender, intersex and queer (LGBTIQ) were actively recruited for staff and volunteer positions and welcomed as spectators and visitors. London also initiated International Inspiration, a Sport for Development and Peace (SDP) program to create new opportunities for 12 million children and youth in 20 developing countries to participate in sport and physical activity, thus sharing the benefits of an Olympics throughout the world. Sadly, the 93 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) Olympic equity agenda was set back in Sochi by the Russian government’s homophobic legislation and the organizers’ chill against LGBTIQ and their allies. At the same time, both Games created huge concerns for me. They included the ginormous cost of hosting the Games, which rightly discourages most communities from ever bidding for them; the billion-dollar investments in surveillance and security, so that the showcase of what began as a peace movement is now an armed camp; and the increasing nationalism of host organizers (in London, I heard official announcers in Olympic venues urging spectators to cheer for GB athletes, a clear violation of the Olympic spirit), which undermines intercultural dialogue. Perhaps most discouraging of all is the increasing preoccupation with medals. From a lifetime of participation in the Olympic Movement, I have always believed that the overarching purpose is to engage the youth of the world in humanistic, embodied education and intercultural exchange, in a way that creates and strengthens global networks committed to peaceful, more equitable and democratic societies and a more sustainable environment. In other words, the purpose of the Olympic Movement should be to realize the humanistic values of Olympism through sport and culture. Although sport can be an engrossing, richly rewarding cultural practice in its own right, Olympic sport should be a means to the realization of Olympism and not an end in itself. Yet in London and Sochi, the race for medals was almost the sole discourse—among athletes and coaches, National Olympic Committees (NOCs) and International Federations (IFs), reinforced by the sport-media complex on which the Olympic Movement has become financially dependent. I strongly believe that such a single-minded focus on the podium has set back our cause. 94 Olympic Idea Nowadays How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement? Susan Brownell University of Missouri-St. Louis (USA) For several decades now, critics have been predicting the demise of the Olympic Games due to excessive commercialization, politicization, and moral corruption; but instead they have become bigger and bigger. Many people, myself included, thought that Beijing would be a peak due to the massive support of the Chinese government and the corporate interest in the Chinese market. However, the global television audience for London surpassed Beijing, and the 109 million unique visitors to the London Olympic Organising Committee website made it the most popular sports website in the world during the Games. Moreover, the global corporate sponsorships also surpassed Beijing - in the midst of a severe global financial crisis. The global TOP sponsorship program for the 2006-2008 cycle (Torino Winter Games & Beijing Summer Games) garnered US$866 million, while the 2010-2012 cycle (Vancouver Winter Games & London Summer Games) increased by 11% to US$957 million. The total revenue from the television broadcasting rights also increased by 51% from US$2.57 billion to US$3.9 billion. The rate of growth appears to have slowed down in the current cycle (2014 Sochi Winter Games & 2016 Rio de Janeiro Summer Games), but the amounts are still growing: over $1 billion for the global sponsorship program and $4.1 billion in broadcasting fees. The American NBC television paid an astounding $4.38 billion for the television broadcast rights from 2014 through 2020; but this was perhaps not so astounding when one considers that the London Olympics were the most-watched event in US history, exceeding by five million the record set in Beijing. Furthermore, if commentators had thought that the $43 billion spent over 7 years on the Beijing Olympic Games would be the peak, they were proven wrong when Sochi ran up a total cost of $51 billion. Sochi should have proven to critics that they are asking the wrong question – they should not focus on what looks like a misuse of huge sums of money, but rather should realize that these sums are not very big for many nations. It might 95 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) be instructive to ask, how much more money might possibly be amassed by wealthier nations given the right conditions? In addition to reflecting the global economy, the Olympic Games reflect global politics. The increasing use of the Olympic media platform by non-governmental organizations and the U.N. to publicize different causes is different from the controversies of past Olympic Games, which were dominated by tensions between national governments. After the Beijing Olympics, the U.N. system and advocacy groups became more sophisticated in their attempts to pressure the organizers. In January 2012 the U.N. sent a special rapporteur on adequate housing to Rio de Janeiro to report on Olympicsrelated evictions there, something it did not do in the lead-up to Beijing. Amnesty International protested the naming of Dow Chemical as a TOP sponsor, resulting in the resignation of the chair of the London “Sustainability Commission.” Human Rights Watch pressured the IOC to compel Saudi Arabia to send its first woman to the Olympic Games, and the Saudis - as well as the other two holdouts (Brunei and Qatar) sent their first female athletes to London. Journalists, activists, academics have been criticizing the gigantism of the Games with increasing sharpness, but their criticism is not having any effect. Academics have a responsibility to better explain what is driving the Olympic growth curve. Something significant is happening in the global political economy, and the Olympic Games are a bellwether. It is probably not so much that London 2012 or Sochi 2014 changed the Olympic Movement. At a minimum, they reflected larger global economic and political trends; at a maximum, they pushed these trends forward. 96 Olympic Idea Nowadays How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement? Nelson Todt Pontificia Universidade Catolica do Rio Grande do Sul Porto Alegre (Brazil) I would like to begin my considerations by calling upon the basis of the Olympic Charter (International Olympic Committee, 2013): • The goal of the Olympic Movement is to contribute to building a peaceful and better world by educating the young through sport practiced in accordance with Olympism and its values (p. 15). • From the time of its constitution to the end of its liquidation, the OCOG (Organizing Committee for the Olympic Games) shall conduct all its activities in accordance with the Olympic Charter, with the agreement entered into between the IOC, the NOC (National Olympic Committee) and the host city and with any other regulations or instructions of the IOC’s Executive Board. (p. 72). From this perspective, there are no elements that would lead us to consider that London 2012 and Sochi 2014 changed the Olympic Movement, but it is possible to mention that both have contributed to this end. Moreover, it is not possible to solve so many questions of global order in one single edition of the Olympic Games. However, it is possible to seek solutions that would contribute to questions like economic and social inequality, including aspects such as multiculturalism, post-modernity and gender issues. Among so many elements associated with the “Mission and Role of the IOC to promote Olympism throughout the world”, I take as a basis the ideas of promoting peace and enhancing women's participation in sport. 97 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) In this way, it is important to mention that the London Games represent a landmark, since Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Brunei, for the first time in their history sent women to compete. Also, for the first time in the history of the Olympic Games all NOCs sent women athletes. This is quite an achievement once 26 nations did not bring any female athletes to the 1996 Olympic Games in Atlanta. Still, there has not been yet an equality of the number of male and female athletes present in the Games, but London 2012 was an important step forward to meeting the goal established by Rogge in the 3rd World Conference on Women and Sport, in 2004. In a different direction, Sochi represented the tagline "Hot. Cool. Yours." But there was another slogan on display near the Olympic Park: the phrase "Russia – Great. New. Open." which provides a better insight on how President Vladimir Putin wants the world to perceive his country now. London promoted the "Get Set for the Olympic Truce", which encourages young people across the UK to learn about the history of the Olympic Truce to debate and discuss ideas to promote peace. Initiatives like this meet the reasons that redirect us to the creation of the IOC, which coincided with the proliferation of a wide range of organizations with internationalist intent, whose main objectives were to promote peace. Any one of these initiatives might be mixed up with hidden political interests, still, they gain importance by the proportion at which they gain grace when technology brings the Games within reach. It is worth remembering that the controversial Russian law banning the promotion of "non-traditional" sexuality was widely seen as an attack on gay rights. Another controversial theme happened in London, where the first athlete was punished for committing an offense in social media. Beyond these questions, these two last editions of the Olympic Games have supported the discussion whether the need to spend so much money existed and whether the money was effectively used in the right places. This concern is renewed by the news that arises about the organization of the Rio 2016 Olympic Games. References International Olympic Committee. 2013. Olympic Charter. Lausanne: IOC. 98 Olympic Idea Nowadays How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement? Dikaia Chatziefstathiou (Greece) Canterbury Christ Church University (UK) Panteion University of Social & Political Sciences (Greece) As I have demonstrated in previous work (Chatziefstathiou, 2005; Chatziefstathiou, 2011; Chatziefstathiou and Henry 2009; Chatziefstathiou and Henry, 2012), the Olympic Movement is not constant, but the discourses of its overt and covert ideological constructions keep shifting. Such discursive and non-discursive practices have also been paradoxical and contradictory at times, e.g. internationalism vs. nationalism; universalism vs. multiculturalism etc. (see Chatziefstathiou, 2011). While charting the place of changing discourses, I demonstrated how sport is an important venue for cultural interaction and emphasised that the development of forms of moral consensus (about the rules, about how to behave in an appropriate manner etc.) should be a priority in a culturally plural, globalised world. The examples of London 2012 and Sochi 2014 point to this direction in different ways, particularly in relation to issues of gender and sexuality. London 2012 Olympics achieved some landmarks of gender equality. They became the first Olympic Games in which all nations included women in their contingent. For the first time Brunei, Qatar and Saudi Arabia sent women athletes. Also there were women competitors in every sport, while women’s participation was overall higher than in previous Games. For example, the US team had more female than male athletes (269 women and 261 men). Another significant development was the inclusion of women’s boxing in the official programme (first gold winner the British Nicola Adams). It is worth recalling here Coubertin’s reference to women’s boxing back in 1928, “Although I would like competitions among boys to be more infrequent, I emphatically insist that the tradition continues. This form of athletic competitiveness is vital in 99 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) athletic education, with all its risks and consequences. Add a female element, and the event becomes monstrous. The experience of Amsterdam seems to have justified my opposition to allowing women into the Olympic Games. On the whole, reaction so far has been hostile to repeating the spectacle that the women's events provided during the Ninth Olympiad. If some women want to play football or box, let them, provided that the event takes place without spectators, because the spectators who flock to such competitions are not there to watch a sport.” (Coubertin 1928: p.604, emphasis added) The changing nature of the Olympic ideology is evident then, especially in terms of gender equality (Chatziefstathiou, 2009). However, the number of events for women still remains much lower than those of men, and issues concerning leadership, funding, media representation, and gender verification need to be further addressed. Sochi 2014 Olympics will be remembered more for stirring a global divide on homosexuality and gay rights than for any athletic performances. The International Lesbian and Gay Association made official complaints for Russia’s gay rights record and asked for no discrimination for all athletes no matter their sexual orientation. But issues of gender and sexuality were intersected with politics and nationalism, e.g. when Obama, in support to the Olympic spirit, made public statements against Putin and Russia. “I think Putin and Russia have a big stake in making sure the Olympics work, and I think they understand that for most of the countries that participate in the Olympics, we wouldn’t tolerate gays and lesbians being treated differently. They’re athletes, they’re there to compete. And if Russia wants to uphold the Olympic spirit, then every judgment should be made on the track, or in the swimming pool, or on the balance beam, and people’s sexual orientation shouldn’t have anything to do with it.” – President Obama (global equality, 2014) I would thus concur with the same conclusion as in my previous work that: 1) Olympism, which was considered a static and closed philosophy, has gradually been transformed to a more open network of ideas accommodating a degree of pluralist vision, and critique, with reference to its values, e.g. gender equality, but 2) one of the key challenges facing those who value Olympism in a multicultural and multipolar world still remains the construction of consensus around its values, e.g. gay rights. References Chatziefstathiou, D., & Henry, I. P. (2012). Discourses of Olympism: From the Sorbonne 1894 to London 2012: Palgrave Macmillan. Chatziefstathiou, D. (2011) Changes and Continuities of the Ideology of Olympism in the Modern Olympic Movement, Sport in Society, 14(3), pp. 332-344 [ISSN: 1743-0437] [ISSN: 1743-0437] 100 Olympic Idea Nowadays Chatziefstathiou, D. and Henry, I.P. (2009) “Olympism, Governmentality and Technologies of Power”, Esporte e Sociedade Journal (Sport and Society Journal), Volume 12, July-August 2009, [ISSN online: 1809-1296] Chatziefstathiou, D. (2009) “Reading Baron Pierre de Coubertin: Issues of Race and Gender”, The Journal of Sport Literature: Aethlon, Issue 25.2 [ISSN: 1048-3756] Chatziefstathiou, D. (2005) The Changing Nature of the Ideology of Olympism in the Modern Olympic Movement. Doctoral thesis. Loughbotough University, UK Coubertin, P 1928, 2000. Message to All Athletes and Participants Meeting at Amsterdam for the Ninth Olympiad. In ed. N Muller, Pierre de Coubertin 1863-1937 - Olympism: Selected Writings, 603-604. Lausanne: International Olympic Committee. The Facts on LGBT in Russia, http://www.globalequality.org/newsroom/latest-news/1-in-thenews/186-the-facts-on-lgbt-rights-in-russia (accessed 15 May 2014) 101 Olympic Idea Nowadays How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement? Hai Ren Beijing Sport University (China) The Olympic Charter has made it clear that “the goal of the Olympic Movement is to contribute to building a peaceful and better world by educating youth through sport practised in accordance with Olympism and its values.” Obviously, without the participation of youth, the Olympic Movement would lose all legitimate reasons for its existence. Youth is crucial to the Olympic Movement. But various investigations in recent years seem to suggest that the attitude of the youth towards the Olympic Games is getting less enthusiastic and the Olympics are being watched more by older viewers. One survey conducted during the 2010 Winter Olympics indicates that ratings among the 18-49 groups are 20% lower than the national average, while ratings among those 55 and older are 82% higher 2. London 2012 and Sochi 2014 tried very hard to attract more teenagers and encourage them to get involved. For instance, there were 12,000 schools across England participating in the 2012 School Games, an initiative launched in 2010 to share the excitement of sport through intra- and inter-school matches, regional sports festivals and the first-ever national School Games at Olympic venues. Twelve winter sports events made their debuts on the Olympic program in Sochi and obviously teenagers were aimed as target groups. However, the result seems to be not so positive since another survey indicates that most viewers of the Sochi Winter Olympics were over 55 years of age, while the 18- to 34-year-old demographic group 2 http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/newswire/2010/how-different-genders-ages-races-and-regions-watch-theolympics.html 103 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) 3 took the smallest fraction of the adult audience . A piece of cheerful news came from the new media: around half (52%) of UK adults followed coverage online on any device. This rose to 64% among those aged 18-24 and 66% among those aged 25-34. Forty-five percent of 18-24 year-olds and 48% of 25-34 year-olds used a mobile phone 4 to stay up to date with the Games, compared to the UK average of 28% . Both negative and positive indicators suggest that the Olympic Movement has not yet achieved the victory in this battle. 3 http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/SB-Blogs/On-The-Ground/2014/02/SochiSiteRepucomTrends.aspx 4 104 Office of Communication, The London 2012 Olympic Games: media consumption, Research Report, 18 December 2012. Olympic Idea Nowadays How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement? Hans Lenk Universität Karlsruhe (Germany) Are there potential visions of the modern Olympics, after London 2012 and Sochi 2014, conducive to reaching a global and cultural as well as a generally acceptable future of the Games and Olympic Movement? I am sure that Coubertin after World War II would have also underlined most of these aspects although some of them go beyond his primary ideas of the “heroic”-agonistic individualism of Greek antiquity and some other traditions of sports and games, e.g., unnecessarily emphasizing some nationalistic overtones and old social class restrictions. 1. It is certainly imperative to hold the Games and the Olympic Movement, politically speaking, independent and neutral to secure the multi-adaptability, multicompatibility and multi-functionality of the Olympic Games and sports in general (Lenk 1964, 2012). The IOC should even use political conditions and measures in a wise manner to save this independence and neutrality of the Games – especially in awarding the future Games to cities and [the] respective countries – even by considering already in advance some international critical developments, demonstrations or internal dangers for staging and organizing the Games (if difficulties could possibly be predicted). Also, a possible easier financing of the Games by very autocratic regimes does not seem to be always a “wise” decision. 2. The opening of the Games and Olympic sports to all social classes and cultures as well as to representatives of different religions and provenances was certainly a main aim of the founders and especially of Coubertin’s vision, but more of that could certainly be done in the nice tradition of the IOC and of the Olympic Solidarity program to guarantee the chances of participation for any gifted young 105 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) athlete. (Problems here still apply to many female would-be candidates of some traditional societies). 3. If you take the explicit achievement-orientation and participation of well-trained athletes as the major aim (even beyond the current “all or nothing” or “single victor” orientation), the globalization of the Olympic sports would also be even more acceptable to other cultures and societies as now e.g., rather cooperative than mainly competitive (“agonistic”). (This would go a bit beyond Coubertin’s ideal). 4. Indeed, as regards to obtaining a “single victory” distinction, a top level achievement orientation in some critical cases should take precedence over the “victory only” ideology: same accomplishments should be valued the same way – and not some of these valued less by some conventional artificial differentiation (like in high jump or pole vault) by extra side-conditions or additional conventional rules (being at times morally speaking “unjust” or sometimes even illogical, as, e.g., in combined competitions with equal overall results in added points or times). 5. Coubertin’s “All games”, i.e. “all sports,” idea should – and does already – open up for new sports that are disseminated in global dimensions – in particular turning to worldwide trend sports of youngsters etc. This has already started as the IOC included snowboarding and skiing slopestyle events in the Winter Games in Sochi 2014 and will include some additional disciplines (like surfing) in summer Games. This orientation would certainly be conducive to the modernization of Olympic events regarding new sports etc. 6. An inspiring new chance the IOC has already taken is now offered by the Olympic Youth Games. Some of such events were already held in antiquity. The traditional festive character of the Olympics was revived as the adolescent athletes of the first decade of the third millennium compete with not too much emphasis on fierce or unfair fights. The orientation for fair play and achievement beyond “Winning is the only thing” should here be supported and fostered indeed. The first Olympic Youth Games held in Singapore did succeed in that respect. 7. An old and yet unrealized idea (as of 1961, Bull. du CIO 75/75) that could be very easily introduced not only in the Youth Games but also in the Olympic Games would be to honor all the finalists at the Victory Ceremonies and not just the three medal winners. 8. In the Youth Olympic Games an ideal might be taken up again, which was used in the first decades of the modern Olympics, in the form of some international teams as, e.g., the double in tennis or few internationally combined teams (like the Australasian ones in swimming team events etc.) could have a valuable educational effect and serve as a certain symbolic paragon function displaying international sporting comradeship. 106 Olympic Idea Nowadays 9. Team sports have been accepted long since - also for women. This is certainly a feature that was already almost completely materialized reaching beyond Coubertin’s original hesitation against team sports and women top level athletics. 10. Team sports have been accepted for a long time - also for women. This is certainly a feature that was already almost completely materialized reaching beyond Coubertin’s original hesitation against team sports and women athletes in top level athletics. 11. WADA’s (World Anti-Doping Agency) and NADAs’ (National Anti-Doping Agencies) stricter anti-doping measures as well as IFs’ (International Federations) rules and legislations are imperative indeed. Perhaps easier and faster tests of earlobe blood drops will allow every Olympic competitor (in disciplines particularly susceptible to doping manipulation) to be tested before his or her participation in any event, with a quick and short report available almost immediately after the exams. Without successfully addressing the overriding problems of doping, the image of honest and fair sports in the Olympics would lose a lot more than it did already in some notorious doping scandals. 12. The Olympic Movement and especially the IOC should try to favor and foster a practice that is primarily athlete-oriented leading to more intensive consideration and strict operationalization of fairness ethics by, e.g., organizing working groups in Olympic philosophy and Olympic ethics 5 and analyzing the possibility of working out an “Olympic world ethics” and a global “World sport ethics (or ethos)”. This has to be based on model and actual analyses of critical situations and conflicts of all kinds to be worked out and supported by in-depth study projects. (The results should be presented in Olympic Congresses between and at the Games and be set in operation by the respective International Federations.) 13. Coubertin’s Olympic elitism as ideally materialized by the outstanding Olympic athletes and their Olympic performances did turn out to be magnificent not only at his time (of excessive nationalism) but also for today and the future since most of the Olympic values and Coubertin’s own visions have been realized and fulfilled in an unprecedented manner and to such a large degree that Coubertin could not even have foreseen it from the beginning. However, all sorts of National Olympic Committees have to see to it that the evidently occurring problems, conflicts and some dysfunctional effects can be mitigated or restricted by precise analyses and wise decision making). 5 Almost half a century ago a former IOC President (Brundage) asked for a renewal of an Olympic philosophy, yet no initiative was realized. There is some optimistic hope in that the new President (Thomas Bach) in his candidacy address prior to the presidential election stressed his intention to have kept, emphasized, analyzed, and further developed the Olympic values. He also pleaded for some extension of the Olympic value system in the sense of a sustaining development as is fashionable today. 107 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) Further Reading: H. L., Values – Aims – Reality of the modern Olympic Games. In: The International Olympic Academy: Fourth session August 1964, Olympia/Greece. Athens 1964, 205-211. H. L., Werte – Ziele – Wirklichkeit der modernen Olympischen Spiele. Schorndorf/Germany 1964, 19722. H. L., S.O.S.: Save Olympic Spirit: Toward a Social Philosophy of the Olympics. Kassel: Agon 2012. 108 Olympic Idea Nowadays How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement?6 Veerle De Bosscher (Belgium) Vrije Universiteit Brussel (Belgium) and Utrecht University (the Netherlands) Change in elite sport investments with diminishing returns Over the past two decades, the power struggle between nations to win medals in major competitions, especially the Olympic Games has intensified. This has led to increasing competition in international sports with extensive investment by sports governments through funding and national lottery funding. As the supply of medals (success) remains essentially fixed (the IOC has indicated that it would like the number of events to be capped at around 300), and the demand for success is increasing (more nations taking part and more nations winning medals), the “market” has adjusted by raising the “price of success” (Shibli, 2003). This is evidenced by data from the SPLISS (Sports Policy factors Leading to International Sporting Success) study (De Bosscher, Bingham, Shibli, van Bottenburg, & De Knop, 2008), which showed from an international comparison in six nations (Canada, Belgium, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, United Kingdom) that expenditures on sport and elite sport increased considerably between 1999 and 2003, ranging from 30% in Norway to 90% in the Netherlands. Italy was the only exception in this regard, with a reduction in expenditure of 27% caused by falling sport gambling receipts in 2003. Interestingly, over the same time period, no nation in the sample improved its market share of medals from Sydney (2000) to Athens (2004). Canada was the only nation which maintained its performance. This finding suggested that as nations strive for success, there are diminishing returns on investment such that it is necessary to continue investing in sport simply to maintain existing performance levels (De Bosscher, 2008). 6 The text corresponds to the same one responding How has the Olympic Movement changed since Sydney 2000, as it covers both questions. 109 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) A follow-up project in 15 countries is still in progress since 2011, involving 58 researchers, 33 policy makers, over 3000 elite athletes, 1300 coaches and 240 performance directors, known as SPLISS 2.0 (De Bosscher et al., in Press). First results confirm a continued ‘escalating global sporting arms race’. Funding increased in almost every nation since the beginning of the 21st century (see figures in appendix), with the exception of Denmark, Estonia, Spain and Portugal. The financial crisis can be a possible explanation in the case of Portugal. The rules of this race are dictated by what rival nations are doing, not on the basis of what an individual nation is doing now compared with what it did in the past. The key question facing all nations taking a strategic approach to elite sport is “to what extent do you wish to be part of this Game?” (De Bosscher et al., 2008, p134). Change in elite sport policy: increasing homogeneity with increasing diversity The global sporting arms race has encouraged nations to adopt a more strategic elite sport policy. Consequently, in their quest for international success in a globalizing world, the elite sport systems of leading nations have become increasingly homogeneous (e.g., Bergsgard, et al., 2007; De Bosscher et al., 2008; Digel, Burk, & Fahrner, 2006; Green & Houlihan, 2005; Houlihan & Green, 2008; Oakley & Green, 2001), with only small variations (Andersen & Ronglan, 2012). However, at a deeper level of policy decisions (and implementation), the SPLISS 2.0 study observed that nations respond with different blends of strong critical success factors. The study highlights that different countries create a competitive advantage just by developing a strength in one (or in a few) policy dimensions (pillars) over others. For example, Australia has the strongest level of development in scientific research (pillar 9) but scores below the average in international competition (pillar 8), while Japan has its strengths in Pillars 8 and 6 (training facilities) and Canada in coach development (pillar 7). The Netherlands had its relative strength in sports participation (pillar 3), talent development (pillar 4) and athletic career support (pillar 5). All these countries are relatively successful in the international arena. Another interesting key issue noted from the SPLISS project concerns the structure and organisation of elite sport policies. Clearly, those countries that have been identified as the most efficient nations given the resources at their disposal (input (funding) output (medals)) –are: Australia, Japan, the Netherlands (summer sports) and Canada, the Netherlands and Switzerland (winter sports) – also have the most integrated and coordinated approach to policy development (pillar 2). Finally, some other changes characterise elite sport policy development over the past decade as summarised below (De Bosscher et al., in press): 110 Olympic Idea Nowadays - Increasing prioritisation policies, where the resources are targeted on only a relatively small number of sports through identifying those that have a real chance of success at world level. All 15 countries of the SPLISS study prioritise their funding to mainly Olympic sports; except for France and South Korea, more than 40% of total elite sports funding is invested in eight sports or less, and for half of the nations this is four sports or less. - Increased government involvement and a “no compromise approach” taken by governments to provide funding but with strings attached in the form of agreed objectives and outputs that must be achieved to maintain the funding. In this respect modernised national governing bodies with a proven track record of delivery and positive future prospects operate within an environment of 'earned autonomy' in which there is an implicit understanding of the notions of sanction and reward. - Increased long-term planning of an athletic career, consequently leading to athletes starting ever younger with their sport, they train more hours, and more national and international championships are organized for younger age categories. Talent identification and development are increasingly seen as a specialist area within elite sport development systems; however, it should be noted that the level of development is still low compared to other elite sport policy areas. - Athletic career support is accepted as a common tool to influence success, with only little variation between nations. Athletes pursuing success in their sport are increasingly recognized as and treated as employees where resources to support the cost of doing business and the cost of maintaining a certain lifestyle funding for living and sporting costs are linked to reasonable living costs. - The increasing recognition of coaches as drivers of an effective elite sport system. Whereas at the beginning of this century the provisions for elite coaches seemed to be relatively immature (De Bosscher et al., 2008), the influence of access to world-class coaching, recognition of the coach profession and the professionalization of coaching careers have become widely accepted. As a net effect, the ease of worker migration and the increasing acceptance of ‘foreign’ coaches created a global market for elite coaches and performance directors. This is yet further evidence of an escalating global sporting arms race. - Scientific research has become a more important source of competitive advantage for elite sport development systems. This is further proof of nations taking a longterm strategic approach to achieving elite sporting success. 111 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) From winning medals to … why winning medals? Society at large shares a widespread trust in the ‘good of sport and elite sport’. As one of today’s most visible social phenomena, sport is - to an increasing extent - associated with a variety of personal and societal outcomes clearly exceeding the sport context. The Olympic Games are a strong example in this regard. Public spending on elite sport has been justified as providing a boost to the country’s economy, improved national identity and pride, international prestige and diplomatic recognition, personal development of talented people and the capacity to inspire increased mass participation in sport. But despite these high expectations, the cumulative evidence base for elite sport’s personal and societal impact remains very weak. They are described as storylines (Fischer, 2003, cited in Houlihan, Bloyce and Smith 2009, p. 5), and understood as an intrinsically “good” thing … framed in a positive, discursive nature allowing few possibilities for thinking otherwise’ (Green, 2004, p. 367). The question of why nations should care about winning medals, and therefore why they should invest in elite sport, the value of Olympic athletes remains unanswered … Answering these questions with evidence-based research may be source of inspiration for the future development of the Olympic Movement. References Andersen, S. S., & Ronglan, L. T. (2012). Nordic Elite Sport: Same Ambitions, Different Tracks: Copenhagen Business School Press. Bergsgard, N. A., Houlihan, B., Mangset, P., Nødland, S. I., & Rommetvedt, H. (2007). Sport Policy: A comparative analysis of stability and change. London, UK: Elsevier. De Bosscher, V., Bingham, J., Shibli, S., Van Bottenburg, M., & De Knop, P. (2008). The global Sporting Arms Race. An international comparative study on sports policy factors leading to international sporting success. Aachen: Meyer & Meyer. De Bosscher, V., Shibli, S., Westerbeek, H., Bottenburg, M., (in press). Winning the Gold war. An international comparison of the Sports Policy factors Leading to International Sporting Success in 15 nations (SPLISS-2.0). Digel, H., Burk, V., & Fahrner, M. (2006). High-performance sport. An international comparison (Vol. 9). Weilheim/Teck, Tubingen: Bräuer. Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing public policy : Discursive politics and deliberative practices: Discursive politics and deliberative practices: OUP Oxford. Green, M. (2004). Changing policy priorities for sport in England: the emergence of elite sport development as a key policy concern. Leisure Studies, 23(4), 365-385. Green, M., & Houlihan, B. (2005). Elite Sport Development. Policy learning and political priorities. New York: Routledge. Oakley, B., & Green, M. (2001). Still playing the game at arm's length? The selective reinvestment in British sport, 1995–2000. Managing Leisure, 6(2), 74-94. doi: 10.1080/13606710110039534 Shibli, S. (2003). Analysing performance at the Olympic Games: Beyond the final medal table. Paper presented at the 11th Congress of the European Association for Sport Management, Stockholm, Sweden. 112 Olympic Idea Nowadays Appendix Figure 1: Elite sport expenditures (x million euros) from government and lotteries by top 20 medal table countries (summer/winter), 2001‐2012. Data actualised for inflation (2012). The figure shows the percentage difference between 2011 and the earliest year where data was available Source: De Bosscher, V., Shibli, S., Westerbeek, H. & van Bottenburg, M. (2015). Successful elite sport policies. An international comparison of the Sports Policy factors Leading to International Sporting Success (SPLISS 2.0) in 15 nations. Aachen: Meyer & Meyer. 113 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) Figure 2: Elite sport expenditures (x million euros) government and lotteries by smaller countries. Data actualised for inflation (2012). The figure shows the percentage difference between 2011 and the earliest year where data was available Source: De Bosscher, V., Shibli, S., Westerbeek, H. & van Bottenburg, M. (2015). Successful elite sport policies. An international comparison of the Sports Policy factors Leading to International Sporting Success (SPLISS 2.0) in 15 nations. Aachen: Meyer & Meyer. Notes with the figures: 1. The data exclude the NOCs’ budgets; this is particularly important in Japan, where the JOC's additional budget spent on elite sport was around €44m in 2010; this information was not available over a longer period; 2. The peak in Brazil during 2007 is explained by the organisation of the Pan American Games, when the total elite sport expenditure was €193.693.066, mainly because of a government funding boost; 3. Switzerland’s 2008 budget excludes €33,6m in FOSPO expenditure on UEFA Euro 2008; the total elite sport expenditure was €82,2m; without this amount, the total expenditure increased over time; data 2001‐2007 are not comparable to 2008 because of other measurement methods 4. Canada is an estimation based on 80% elite sport expenditures and 20% sport (see earlier) 114 Olympic Idea Nowadays How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement? Deanna L. Binder Royal Roads University, Victoria (Canada) Fair play is never just caught; it has to be taught.” (Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport. 1995. Fair Play for Kids) From the founding of the Olympic Movement in 1894, scholars have explored the definitions and meanings related to the concept of “Olympism”. Rarely, however, have these discussions taken place from within the theoretical framework of the discipline of pedagogy – in spite of the fact that Pierre de Coubertin’s objective in reinventing the Olympic Games was to promote educational reform in the schools of France through the introduction of games and sport. Thus, for the many decades of discussions on the Olympic idea, the following question always hovered in the background: How can the values of “Olympism” be promoted - in sport, to other young people and to the broader community. This is an educational question. Communication tools, such as booklets on the Olympic traditions and the Olympic Games, responded to this question by providing information. A comprehensive national program to link Olympic and sport topics with curriculum outcomes of Canadian schools - launched by the Organizing Committee of the Calgary 1988 Olympic Winter Games and the Canadian Olympic Committee - was successful in demonstrating that the Olympic idea has relevance beyond the narrow world of Olympic competitions and elite sport. The concrete representations of the Olympic idea, such as symbols, ceremonies, inspiring stories and the Olympic call for international peace and friendship, inspired educational engagement in schools. Since 1988 Olympic organizing committees have been required by the IOC to include an Olympic Education component in their bids for Olympic Games. The newly established Youth Olympic 115 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) Games prioritize values-based and cultural educational activities along with sport competitions as a key organizing principle. Teachers and youth group leaders in different parts of the world work within very different political, religious and educational systems. These differences are exemplified in the way that organizing committees for Olympic Games plan and implement their educational strategies. Calgary and Sydney (2000) are situated in countries with decentralized educational systems. Teaching materials offered flexible, curriculum-based information and activities. Sydney was the first to use a digitized format, making DVDs available to every school, and creating a user-friendly web site with interactive components. Athens (2004) and Beijing (2008), on the other hand are situated in countries with a very centralized educational system. Textbooks and workbooks for students provided information about the history, traditions, sports, philosophy of the Olympic Movement, and promoted national pride in the Olympic Games. London (2012) and Sochi (2014) offer an opportunity to explore in some detail the differences in the way that organizing committees for Olympic Games plan and implement their educational programs. This planning obviously begins with the political and educational priorities of (a) the organizers, and (b) the ministries of education. Russia is a vast nation, and, like Canada, many of its people have limited knowledge or understanding of the Olympic Movement. So providing Olympic knowledge and information about the Sochi 2014 Olympic Winter Games to people in the far-flung regions of the nation was a priority. Another priority for Russia was to educate people about the Paralympic Games, and in the process to promote acceptance of people with disabilities, the development of barrier-free access in public and private spaces and the participation of people with disabilities in sport. The main objective of Paralympic Education is to show Russian society as a whole, and people with disabilities in particular, how rich and varied life can be thanks to Paralympic sport. The tasks for the project are to spread information about the philosophy and values of the Paralympic Movement, to foster a friendly and welcoming atmosphere in Russia towards people with disabilities, which will enable the Paralympic Games of 2014 in Sochi to be a success, and to provide a high level of service and professionalism among all the people involved in organizing the Games (Sochi 2014, Paralympic Awareness Program. Online at http://www.sochi2014.com/en/paralympic-awareness-program) To this end a variety of strategies evolved, including the mobilization of volunteers from the network of the corporate sponsors of the Games and prominent Russian athletes to make presentations in schools throughout the nation. Another Russian priority was to establish an “Olympic University” in Sochi as a legacy of the Games. Sport management is its focus, providing the nation with a state of the art facility to 116 Olympic Idea Nowadays train people for participation in the various aspects of the delivery of sport and sporting events. London (2012), on the other hand, wanted to link its educational initiative (a) to the Olympic values, and (b) to promoting participation in sport and physical activity. Titled “Get Set,” the London initiative used an interactive website to provide students and teachers with access to free learning resources for 3-19 year olds, such as inspirational films, games, activity ideas and fact sheets, which help young people explore the Olympic values and enable them to play their part in the London 2012 Olympic Games. Get Set aimed to enhance teaching and learning by helping teachers to link learning outcomes to the London 2012 Games. It is also a flexible programme which helped students to explore the Olympic values of excellence, friendship and respect, and the Paralympic values of determination, inspiration, courage and equality, to apply them at local level, and to make the Games relevant for young people in every community across the UK. A “Get Set” network linked schools and colleges, offering rewards, recognition and endorsement for work around the values. Reports on the success of the programme indicate that more than 26,000 schools and colleges registered to receive access to resources and opportunities inspired by London 2012. 91% of registered schools undertook Paralympic activity as part of the programme and 84% of teachers say that “Get Set” had a positive impact on their enthusiasm and motivation in 2012. London 2012 Games organizers and the UK government wanted to “inspire a generation,” highlighting the goal of increasing participation in sport as a major priority for and legacy of the London Games. Reports on the rates of participation both prior to and after the Games offer conflicting information. One lesson to be learned, however, about leveraging interest in an Olympic Games to motivate grassroots participation in sport and physical activity was described by a senior executive on the London Olympic Games organizing committee. "If I look back, the one lesson I've learned is that it's absolutely pointless talking about legacy when the event is over. If you do that, you've missed a trick," said Debbie Jevans, who is now CEO of the 2015 Rugby World Cup. "We maybe could have planned that participation [legacy] with all the sports better in the build-up of the seven years we had to the Olympic Games.” (Gibson, O. London 2012 Olympic organiser Debbie Jevans says 'we missed legacy trick.' Olympics 2012. Online at http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/nov/06/london-2012-olympic-debbiejevans-legacy) We look to Rio (2016) and Pyeongchang (2018) to further enhance the values-based legacies of hosting an Olympic Games. Understanding the pedagogy and psychology of values education can offer strategies for assuring the achievement of those legacies. 117 Olympic Idea Nowadays How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement? Otávio Tavares Universidade Federal do Espirito Santo, Vitoria (Brazil) The complexity involved in everything related to the Olympic Movement allows us to state that London 2012 and Sochi 2014, as probably all the previous editions of the Games, somehow contributed positively or negatively to understand and define the Olympic Movement, supporting or changing it. This is due to the fact that as a phenomenon historically situated, the Olympic Movement is necessarily the product of complex interactions among different actors. In this context, it seems more productive to think about threats and opportunities than about supports and changes. From this point of view, one could say that London 2012 and Sochi 2014 can be seen as the latest manifestation of a growing trend of commodification and spectacularization of the Olympic Games. It seems that both trends should be considered as threats to the continuity of the Movement because their advance jeopardizes the recognition of his humanistic self-defined mission. The commodification of the Games is revealed in the observed centrality of the commercial dimension of the event. The Olympic symbols are desired for their ability to add value to different global brands. But when sponsors’ brands become as present as the Olympic symbols, something is lost in understanding that what makes the Olympic Movement unique is its fundamental principles. The second threat – possibly others can be identified – lies in the spectacularization of the Games in general and the opening and closing ceremonies in particular. According to many scholars, Olympic ceremonies can be understood as secular rituals celebrating the universality of the Movement and its values. However, since Seoul 1988, ceremonies have been turned into a kind of propaganda and celebration of history, identity and culture of the host country, completely reversing their original meanings. The search for an even greater ‘wow’ effect than that obtained in previous Games makes the Olympic ceremonies a remarkable show where some 119 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) elements of the Olympic protocol become displaced and essential elements for maintaining the identity of the Olympic movement, its values, history and founding myths, obscured. A third threat reemerged during the Games in Sochi 2014: the explicitly political use of the Games and the threat of boycotts. During the twentieth century not infrequently the Games were stage for demonstrations of political causes and /or they were boycotted by nations in search of a safe, symbolic and highly visible tool to demonstrate dissatisfaction on international geopolitical clashes. On one hand, the 2014 Games were seen by many as a manifestation of power and grandeur of the current government of Russia. On the other hand, the threat of a boycott by Western countries because of the crisis in Ukraine was again heard with some seriousness. However, as modern Janus gods, these Games continued to offer examples that the vigor that remains in the Olympic Movement lies precisely in its symbolic significance. Sport at Olympic level is still seen as a possible answer to ontological questions about the feasibility of human deeds besides attracting attention worldwide. The universalistic mystique of the Games continued to be the reason for the continued scrutiny and debate about equality and difference, unity and diversity. In this sense, despite the threats of banality and anachronism, London 2012 and Sochi 2014 still showed signs of what the Olympics should be all about. 120 Olympic Idea Nowadays How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement? Heather L. Reid Morningside College, Sioux City, Iowa (USA) It is common in modern western society to think of ethics and fair play in terms of rules and principles, relegating such vagaries as the Olympic spirit to an inspirational role in official speeches, ceremonies, and advertising. There were various incidents at London 2012 that challenged the equation between fair play and rule-adherence—a refreshing change from the very analytical struggle against doping that had dominated moral discourse in Olympic sport. The most visible example at London was the disqualification of several badminton players for not using their best efforts in preliminary matches. Their motivation appears to have been strategic—a way of resting before more important matches in a later round. It is permitted—arguably encouraged—by the constitutive rules of the game, but it violates the fundamental Olympic ethos that finds joy in effort, and officials found a way to penalize it. An Algerian runner was likewise disqualified for not trying hard enough in an 800m race, apparently to save himself for the 1,500. His disqualification was later revoked—but it revealed a newfound intolerance for the instrumentalist ethos of putting victory before honor and raised the question of what fair play really means. While I applaud officials’ efforts to enforce an Olympic ethos over and against the widespread athletic ethos of doing whatever it takes to gain an edge, it must be recognized that fair play and the Olympic spirit more broadly are not things that can be reduced to rules. Whereas it may be useful to write and enforce rules that prohibit intentionally poor performances—there is also a great danger that such rules might be abused by officials and athletes alike. One is reminded of the women’s soccer match 121 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) between USA and Canada in which an American player counted out loud to alert the referee to an infrequently-called ball-holding violation by the Canadian goalkeeper. An ethos just is a value shared by a community and the way to foster such values is by celebrating them publically while deriding their opposites. Sochi 2014 produced more than one example of such celebration—for example, when Canadian Nordic ski coach Justin Wadsworth gave a spare ski to a rival skier, enabling him to finish the race, or when Swiss victor Dario Cologna waited 28 minutes at the finish line to personally congratulate the last finisher in his race. Meanwhile, there was public derision and even threats of boycott over the host country’s discriminatory attitudes towards homosexuals. As with the 1936 Games in Berlin, a boycott would probably have done less to combat discrimination than the discussion inspired by the Games did. Putin’s public embrace of a gay athlete may have been a political publicity stunt, but it reveals the power of public moral discourse to influence people’s behavior. Fair play and Olympic values are cultivated by their public expression and celebration in a community. If the Olympic Movement can walk the walk in addition to talking the talk, it can become an effective moral community indeed. 122 Olympic Idea Nowadays How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement? Jean-Loup Chappelet Swiss Graduate School of Public Administration (IDHEAP) of the University of Lausanne (Switzerland) The Sochi Olympics are over. They have broken all records for a Winter Games, most notably by having the first Olympic park of impressive ice rinks and arenas to have been built entirely from scratch on the Black Sea side. According to the Russians’ own figures, the budget for Sochi 2014 was much higher than the cost of even the last two Summer Games, Beijing (2008) and London (2012). Two years away, Rio 2016 is facing a difficult time and the future is uncertain. The new president of the IOC (International Olympic Committee) has understood this, which is why at the end of this year he will be putting forward his “Agenda 2020” program to preserve the uniqueness of the Olympic Games and make it easier to manage gigantism. However, media reports suggest that the IOC’s brainstorming session, held just before the Sochi Games, generated few new ideas. For example, it is difficult to see how reinstating visits to candidate cities by IOC members, and raising or abolishing the age limit for IOC members will make running the Games easier or cheaper, even if it would not be too difficult to persuade current IOC members to pass these measures. The old but effective idea of spreading the Games over an entire country (using existing facilities), which is already practised for football, would mean abandoning the idea of a unique Olympic village where athletes from around the world can come together (as it has been already done at the Winter Games). The main risk that must be avoided is no longer having enough bids for future Olympic editions because of the difficulty of hosting the Games. Four or five cities are bidding for the 2022 Winter Olympics, two (Lausanne and Brasov) for the 2020 Winter Youth Games, and, currently, just one (Doha, Qatar) for the 2024 Summer Olympics. Rome, Vienna, Dubai, and Toronto, for the Summer Olympics, and St. Moritz, Munich, and 123 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) Stockholm, for the Winter Olympics, have recently withdrawn their bids. This is reminiscent of the post-Montreal syndrome (only one candidate for the 1980 Winter Olympics and only one for the 1984 Summer Olympics), with mayors or ministers being unconvinced of the worth of bidding for or hosting the Olympics, as, after Sochi, the prestige that goes with being an Olympic city or country will no longer be guaranteed. The real problem for the long term is to keep the Olympic Games in phase with the society in which we are living. This is where significant innovation is needed. In the 20th century, the success of the Olympics following the Great War was largely due to the rise of nationalism combined with the emerging spirit of the League of Nations. Then, after World War Two, the Cold War made the Olympics the only place where the Soviet and western blocs could confront each other peacefully. Today, the spirit of competition between cities and countries or athletes that the Games promote has weakened. People still enjoy peaceful contests between nations, but their fervour has waned. In Europe, people at the grass-roots level of sport are abandoning sport clubs where competition is a prime motivator, preferring to do their sport individually or in popular mass-participation events. At the Olympics, on the other hand, it often is no longer taking part that counts, but winning (sometimes at any price, even if that means doping or cheating). There is also a growing discrepancy between the Olympics and the society that finances them through sponsorship and television. Some TV channels are finding that covering the Games is no longer profitable. The 14 February (apex of the Games) edition of the French sport newspaper L’Equipe dedicates only 4 pages out of 22 to the Games. Of course, this cannot continue forever. Soon, we may be facing a similar situation to the Ancient Olympics, which disappeared painlessly in 393 AD. But the modern Games must be safeguarded, as they are one of the very few examples of peaceful coexistence we have, as demonstrated by the presence of the UN Secretary General at the Sochi 2014 opening ceremony. The IOC is lucky enough to control two universal symbols of this coexistence: the five interlinked rings (omnipresent at the Olympic venues and on television during the Olympic fortnight) and the flame relay (which precedes the Games and finishes at the end of the opening ceremony). These symbols, which help finance the Games, deserve protection as part of the world’s heritage. Consequently, we need to bring the Games back in step with the spirit of the 21st century by putting greater store on truly sustainable development, human rights, fair trade, etc. perhaps even reducing their size and/or cost, instead of putting competition and growth above all else. Rather than insisting on elite sport only, more space needs to be made for adaptive, Paralympic sport (in the main program, possibly extended to three weeks), grass-roots sport (e.g., a mass-participation marathon), culture (as at the Francophone Games), non-Olympic sports (as at the World Games), and the young (as at the Youth Games and renewed Universiades), etc. Great inspiration for ways of 124 Olympic Idea Nowadays keeping the modern Olympics unique could be drawn from other multi-sport games. In fact, the IOC has created a working group to see what lessons they can learn from such events. It should also be possible to regularly reuse the vastly expensive Olympic parks built since Sydney 2000 for the Summer Olympics and since Sochi 2014 for the Winter Olympics. Coubertin’s vision of a modern Olympia, a permanent summer Olympic site that was to be built at Lausanne-Dorigny at the beginning of the 20th century, is no longer realistic. But it should not be out of the question for the Olympics to move from park to park, from continent to continent, as almost every continent (except Africa and North America) already has one or more Olympic parks. It is only through such major reforms that the Olympic Games will once again become, as they have always been, in tune with the spirit of the times, thereby ensuring their continuing longevity. 125 Olympic Idea Nowadays How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement? Cesar R. Torres (Argentina) The College of Brockport State University of New York (USA) Neither London 2012 nor Sochi 2014 seems to have significantly changed the Olympic Movement. In some respect, both events could be seen as continuing, and some would argue deepening, the confluence of transnational corporations and global media at the Olympic Games that started to gain momentum in the 1980s. This confluence has led to the increasing commercialization, branding, marketing, and spectacularization of the Olympic Games. According to many critics, by taking center stage, this process and the values inherent in it have moved the Olympic movement away from the humanistic vision purportedly residing at its core. Judging by the global media representations of both London 2012 and Sochi 2014, the criticisms are not unfounded: interest in the commoditization of the “great symbol” (the five interlaced rings) surpassed, considerably, interest in what they actually mean. On the other hand, more propitious developments were also observed in London 2012 and Sochi 2014. For instance, the Olympic Games were confirmed as an event gathering representatives from the world over. All 204 National Olympic Committees (NOCs) were present in London 2012. While the Olympic Winter Games are smaller in scale and have traditionally been attended by fewer NOCs, 88 of them were present at Sochi 2014, a record participation for the event. Gender equity is another area to highlight. Female athletes made up approximately 44 per cent of competitors in London 2012, an all-time high. In addition, female athletes competed in all sports on the Olympic program for the first time. Also for the first time, all NOCs included female athletes in their delegations. Along the same lines, 35 NOCs included more female than male athletes. This does not mean that gender equity has been fully achieved in the Olympic movement as females are underrepresented in, for example, 127 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) administration and coaching, but it represents progress in an area in which much still is to be done. Some occurrences at or related to both London 2012 and Sochi 2014 brought to the fore and ignited debate on different aspects of the Olympic movement. First, the celebrated participation of South African sprinter Oscar Pistorius in London 2012, the first double amputee sportsperson to compete at the Olympic Games, raised questions about the relationship between the Olympic and Paralympic movements as well as the role of technology in sport. Second, after a few days of hesitation, a female Saudi judoka was allowed to compete using the hijab. The case made explicit the tensions and challenges that multiculturalism poses to and in the Olympic movement. Third, the portrayal and treatment of homosexuality in Russia were a concern in athletic, social, and political circles, mainly in the West, that led to protests, campaigns, and even talks of boycotting Sochi 2014. Such actions highlighted the need to rethink what variables should be taken into consideration when a city is chosen to host the Olympic Games and how identities that do not conform to heteronormative ideals are treated in the Olympic movement. These debates are important to the Olympic movement, not only for their practical urgency but also because they point out to one key aspiration of Olympism: the promotion of intercultural interaction. Being confronted with different forms of life, beliefs, and sensibilities is at the center of Olympism. Both London 2012 and Sochi 2014, either willingly or not, helped to promote dialogue among the diverse peoples of the world so that they might respect and understand each other and themselves better. 128 Olympic Idea Nowadays How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement? Holger Preuss Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz (Germany) London Olympic Games 2012 1. London started and successfully implemented the value of “sustainable” development through the Olympic Games. Due to serious programs and associated research, the world has learnt that sustainability can be a positive driver for all activities in the Olympic Movement. 2. London reached a new dimension of commercialisation, which became visible to all Olympic visitors by positioning a shopping centre in front of the Olympic Park and forcing visitors to pass through it. 3. By looking at the UK medal success, London has proven that governmental (financial) support and good sport management – supported by the home effect – can severely increase the sporting success of a country. 4. The geographical size of London is big and therefore the spread of facilities was equally large (even though nicely put in clusters). The Games have shown that hosting them in a region might be as interesting as having them in one city. 5. The use of military personnel instead of other security services gave a feeling of security. The soldiers were friendly and added to the overall positive atmosphere. 6. After the Games in Beijing were perceived by many as lacking atmosphere and spirit (though perfectly organised) for diverse reasons, London brought back to the Games a sense of easiness. 129 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) Sochi Olympic Winter Games 2014 130 1. The selection of Sochi was difficult to understand by the world population due to four reasons: 1) the difficulty to reach the place, 2) a city too small for the Games (and therefore too much new construction for the previous size of the city) and 3) the severe environmental damage (although the Olympic Movement claims environment as its third pillar). This somewhat destroyed the sustainable image London 2012 added to the Movement. Difficult to understand was also the fact that 4) a summer resort hosts Winter Games even though the Caucasus has a lot of snow in winter. 2. Based on media reports, one got the feeling that corruption and an unfree market made a few people profit a lot from the construction in Sochi. Information about hotel prices and the ownership of hotels added to the feeling that Sochi is governed by a small group of businessmen and all it can offer is monopolised prices. 3. Due to all the new construction, new hotels, roads etc. and due to the immense security measures the Games appeared hygienic and artificial. 4. Due to the expectation of having mainly Russians attending the Games, the atmosphere lacked “internationalism” and “mutual understanding” was not fostered among visitors. 5. The facilities and the sport program were perfect and the Games delivered the best possible conditions for the athletes. 6. Discussions about Russian laws, lacking freedom of speech and freedom of press as well as the awareness of corruption in Russia were too much and negatively affected the feelings about the Olympic Movement, in particular after Beijing 2008. 7. The right-holding media companies do not want to spoil their product and therefore whenever the sport program at the Games starts, negative reporting ends. It was good for the Movement and Sochi that sport entered the overall negative pre-Games news. Olympic Idea Nowadays How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement? Gavin Poynter University of East London (United Kingdom) London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported the Olympic Movement but in so doing also revealed the necessity for change. The Olympic Movement represents more than its institutional forms (the IOC, international and national sports federations) and has sought to protect and project its values in a global setting in which the sports industry has rapidly expanded and the role of sport within societies has changed. Recent competitions between bidding cities have been informed by the IOC’s adoption of principles designed to ensure a successful event as well as requiring candidates to demonstrate their commitment to achieving longer term social, economic, cultural and environmental benefits for the host city and nation. In this sense, the Olympic Movement’s dual emphasis on the sporting and social legacies resulting from hosting the Games has encouraged bidding cities and national governments to construct candidate files that aspire to use the Games as a catalyst of urban transformation and engage in highly competitive and costly campaigns to secure IOC and public support. In the case of London 2012, the host city’s emphasis on the social and economic legacies to be achieved by locating the Olympic Park in a relatively socially deprived area of the city, appeared to effectively counter concerns about the costs, direct and indirect, associated with hosting the event; London delivered a well organised Games and the Paralympics achieved new levels of public support and international recognition. For Jacques Rogge, then IOC President, London 2102 offered insights into how a host city and nation could secure public approval for significant levels of public investment and for the sporting festival to provide a blueprint for achieving the regeneration of a long neglected brownfield area of the city. The narrative of legacy, incorporated into government, city-wide and local plans in the pre-event phase, helped to cohere the complex framework of governance required to ensure effective 131 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) preparation for the event and avoid the spectre of ‘white elephants’ in its wake. The city, already global in reputation, preserved its status while stimulating the regeneration of an area of its east-side. Sochi 2014 also adopted the narrative of legacy in presenting an ambitious proposal for the development of a city, known as a Black Sea summer resort, to become a year round destination for tourism through the creation of a new winter sport complex in the Krasnaya Polyana mountain area. Significant infrastructure investment was promised to connect the city to the winter resort and hosting the 2104 winter Games was perceived by the host nation and city as a means to accelerate existing development plans. The Games witnessed the introduction of twelve new events and at their close the newly elected IOC President Thomas Bach acknowledged that the Russian Federation had delivered on its promises, achieving a successful edition of the Games and a long-term sports and urban legacy in the province of Sochi. On closer inspection, the achievements of the two host cities reveal, however, the demands imposed upon them by their adoption of legacy as a legitimising narrative in their initial application and candidate files. Direct and, particularly indirect (infrastructure) costs exceeded initial estimates. London’s Games were prepared to the backdrop of global economic recession and turmoil in financial markets. As a consequence, the city relied entirely upon public investment in its preparations for the event while Sochi’s infrastructure development attracted domestic and wider criticism concerning the contractual relations underpinning the vast building project and depended significantly on the support of the Russian government and its President. The achievements of London 2012 and Sochi 2014 reflected their support for the Olympic Movement’s commitments to achieving sporting and urban legacies while, paradoxically, also revealing the necessity for change. The prevailing narrative of legacy currently encourages Olympic cities to promise too much to too many. The danger is that in coupling the world’s leading sporting event to an intensive programme of urban renewal each may diminish the social value of the other. 132 Olympic Idea Nowadays How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement? Robert K. Barney University of Western Ontario, London (Canada) When one reflects back on the most recent editions of the Olympic Games, the Summer Festival in London, and the Winter Games of Sochi, one is invariably pulled in opposite directions, one expressing admiration, another underscored by dismay. One hopes that “admirable outcomes” will be continued, and that “dismay connotations” will be corrected. Certainly, there is little to argue in both cases pertinent to the quality of competition, the television production of the enterprise, and the numbers of people worldwide who were either on-site spectators, or vicariously present by virtue of viewing transmissions from various forms of electronic media. Taken together, the number of on-site and electronic spectators rendered ample proof that the Olympics remain without peer in reflecting the fact that there is no other regularly occurring megaevent in the world that galvanizes such attention. Commercial advertisers, both domestic and international, know this all too well. In the case of the London Games, it is encouraging to note, too, that some facilities were designed to be dismantled and their materials salvaged or re-designed and renovated to better serve public use after the Olympics disappeared from the scene—they will not end up, as so many have, proverbial white elephants, stark reminders on urban landscapes of poor planning, long-term financial burdens borne by the public monies, indeed reminders of shattered dreams. Most would agree that the opening ceremonies of each certainly rivalled, if not exceeded the presentations of recent past Olympic festivals. From the English “pop” culture display in London, to the rich Russian historical elaboration in Sochi, the standard of each preserved, if not extended, Olympic rite and ceremonial ritual. 133 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) The Games, the financial and public relations engine of the Modern Olympic Movement, continue to battle against the terrifying envelopment of commercialism. And yet, without that envelopment, it could be argued that there would be no Olympic Games. What the proceeds of marketing and selling the Olympics have brought to the Movement, especially over the last three decades of history, has allowed the festival and its most fundamental constituent, the athletes, to flourish in their dedicated journeys of pursuing excellence. Despite this, the costs attached to mounting the “greatest of great” mega-events are skyrocketing beyond comprehension. Are the negatives often left in the wake of Olympic extravaganzas—disruption in and impingements on the social and physical environment, burdensome financial legacies, and political turmoil over shares of the spoils, if any—offset by renewed senses of urban pride, improved public facilities and systems, beautification infrastructure, indeed, improvement in the conditions of human life for urban populations? If the answer is “no,” then the Olympic Games and their greater sponsor, the Modern Olympic Movement, cannot hope to envision a healthy and robust future. 134 Olympic Idea Nowadays How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement? David Wallechinsky (USA) President of the International Society of Olympic Historians The Problem of Universality in Olympic Winter Games Participation One of the goals of the Olympic Movement is to bring together athletes from all over the world. At the London 2012 Summer Games every one of the 204 National Olympic Committees entered at least two athletes, so that goal was achieved. Such was not the case at the Sochi 2014 Winter Games. Of the 204 nations that are members of the International Olympic Committee (IOC), only 88 entered athletes in 2014, while 116 did not. Of the 88 participating nations, 29 sent only one or two athletes. Only 34 nations sent 10 or more athletes. The narrow focus of the Winter Games can also be seen by looking at the distribution of medals. Just six nations (Russia, United States, Norway, Canada, Netherlands and Germany) won more than half the medals (52.5%). The top 10 countries (including Austria, France, Sweden and Switzerland) took home 72.5% of the medals. By comparison, at the London 2012 Games, the 10 leading countries earned 57% of the medals. In the London Games, athletes from 85 different nations earned medals. At the Sochi Games, the number was 26. The IOC has attempted to broaden the appeal of the Winter Games by adding more and more events, including twelve that were contested for the first time in 2014. However, the same countries that dominate the medals overall did so as well in the new events, with athletes from the United States, Canada, Germany, Russia, Austria, France and Norway winning 29 of the 36 medals (80%). 135 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) At the London 2012 Games the sensitive topic of race was not an issue when one considers medal-winning success. But the Sochi Winter Games were a different story. Although about 17% of the world’s population would probably self-identify as “white” or “Caucasian,” at the 2014 Winter Games, 93% of the medal winners were white. Clearly, when one considers participation, whether at an elite or non-elite level, the Winter Olympics do not have the universal appeal of the Summer Olympics. 136 Olympic Idea Nowadays How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement? Vassil Girginov (Bulgaria) Brunel University, London (United Kingdom) The London 2012 and Sochi 2014 editions of the Olympic and Paralympic Games have made a significant contribution to bridging between the gist of Olympism, as a movement for social change, and its practical manifestation, the Olympic festival. London more than any other previous host has framed the Olympics as a developmental project including a well-articulated vision, social change anticipated and delivery mechanisms. For the first time in Olympic history the host country has offered a ‘social contract’ for the delivery of the Games between the government and society (Girginov and Hills, 2009). Explicit in this contract was a commitment on the part of the UK government to use the Games to transform British society. Through three consecutive policy documents (DCMS, 2007, 2008, 2009) the government has presented the Olympics and their legacy as publically constructed process and invited British society to actively make the most of the opportunities presented by the Games in order to promote a comprehensive change at individual, community and country levels. Both the Government and the Organising Committee of the Games (LOCOG) have also attempted to export the transformational potential of the Games internationally across 20 countries through the ‘International Inspiration’ programme. British government’s approach to London 2012 constitutes a novel example of political leveraging of the Games on a mass scale at the heart of which was the idea of the democratization of Olympic experience through an improved process of governance (Girginov, 2012). It also provided political and practical meaning to Olympic leveraging, which goes beyond the 17 days of competition and spans the build up period to the Games and many years after them. 137 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) London established four high compelling expectations meaning that no Games can be hold in the future without: (i) explicitly framing their developmental visions for wider social change that goes beyond the field of sport; (ii) fully integrating the notion of sustainability in all aspects of the Games planning and implementation operations; (iii) putting in place a governance model that will guarantee the balance of the global and local agendas; and (iv) developing a sound and long-term strategy for Games legacy. Owing to the limited social, economic and marketing potential of the Winter Games and the geographical, cultural and economic diversity of Russia, the ‘social contract’ that was put in place was essentially between the state and the Organizing Committee for the Winter Olympic Games of Sochi. The host country has used the power of Olympic brand, and the global political, media and business scrutiny that comes with it to instigate a number of changes locally. Sochi has successfully leveraged the promise of Olympic experience presented by the Games in order to democratise various sectors of society. The Sochi 2014 Organizing Committee led the way to a number of national reforms funded by the state including undertaking to educate the country about sustainability in practice by subjecting all of its operations to some 400 sustainable requirements. The Sochi 2014 Organizing Committee has worked closely with leading international agencies such as UNEP (United Nations Environmental Programme), UNDP (United Nations Development Programme), WHO (World Health Organization) and the Red Cross through a range of joint programmes in order to establish national standards of sustainability. Before the Sochi Games the concept of green build was virtually unknown in Russia, but as a result now some 200 cities have adopted the Sochi example of sustainability. The Sochi 2014 Organizing Committee also developed a unique Games volunteers programme, but its implementation required changing the law, which was successfully achieved. The voluntary hubs that were established across the country, as result of the Games, have successfully continued to promote volunteering both in sport and beyond on a permanent basis. Both the London and Sochi Olympics have helped advance the IOC Olympism in Action agenda in their own unique way and have set up new standards for public engagement with the Games and a new Games governance and event management model. Equally, these Games also presented some challenges to the Olympic Movement which are discussed in the next section. References DCMS. (2009). London 2012: A legacy for disabled people: Setting new standards, changing perceptions. London: SCMS. DCMS. (2008). Before, during and after: making the most of the London 2012 Games. London: DCMS. 138 Olympic Idea Nowadays DCMS. (2007). Our promise for 2012: How the UK will benefit from the Olympic and Paralympic Games. London: DCMS. Girginov, V. (2012). Governance of the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games. In V. Girginov (Ed), Handbook of the London 2012 Olympic & Paralympic Games. Routledge: London.130-145. Girginov, V. & Hills, L. (2009). The Political Process of Constructing Sustainable London Olympics Sports Development Legacy, International Journal of Sport Policy, 1 (2), 161-181. 139 Olympic Idea Nowadays How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement? Otto Schantz Universität Koblenz-Landau (Germany) As a general analysis of the London 2012 and the Sochi 2014 Games and their impact on the Olympic movement would exceed the space allocated, I will focus my reflections on some specific problems which the IOC had to face concerning diversity and alterity of athletes during these Games. The Olympic Games in London 2012 and in Sochi 2014 can be considered as landmarks concerning the equal treatment of women and the fight against discrimination on the base of gender: in London 2012 the number of female participants and competitions for women had been the most important ever; all participating countries had at least one woman in their team and boxing, one of the last typical male sports domain, opened its doors for women. Furthermore, the IOC managed to allow Caster Semenya’s participation in the women’s 800-m race after she had been treated in a hideous manner by sport institutions and media after her victory in the 2009 World Championships. In Sochi 2014 new mixed competitions were introduced and women competed for the first time in ski jumping at the Olympics. However, in 2012 and 2014 the Olympic movement, which has made incontestable progress in the treatment of women, had to face other problems of human diversity and alterity. During the London Games 2012 another milestone event highlighted a specific problem of nondiscrimination and equal treatment of athletes. Oscar Pistorius, the fastest man without legs, a multiple Paralympic medal winner, qualified for and participated in the Olympic 400-m race using artificial legs. This case provoked endless and controversial debates in the media, within the general public and the academic world. Should Pistorius be allowed to compete against able-bodied athletes? Is he advantaged by his “cheetah” prostheses, which could be considered as a kind of 141 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) techno doping? Is his running style species-specific or is his way to move incomparable with human running patterns? Is there still a fair competition? Would it be discriminatory to ban him from Olympic competition? Those are some of the questions raised during this debate. Pistorius was not the first Olympian with disabilities or the first athlete participating in the Olympic and Paralympic Games. He wasn’t even the first athlete to use artificial legs, as, already in 1904, the American gymnast George Eyser competed in the St. Louis Olympics and won, advantaged or disadvantaged by his wooden leg, five Olympic medals (3 gold, 2 silver and 1 bronze). However, Pistorius was the first Olympian with disabilities who attracted a huge public attention and who polarized the public opinion. This controversial debate shows that Pistorius does not fit any of the traditional sport categories. While today, in almost all social fields, our societies tend to be open, to respect and to accept all kinds of human diversity and alterity, the field of sport still classifies people in bipolar categories like male – female, or disabled – able-bodied, categories which do not reflect the biological and social realities. According to Foucault’s concept of monstrosity, those who do not fit these categories are treated as monstrosities and are therefore marginalized. Despite the official Paralympic and Olympic discourses, which claim that both Games are parallel and equivalent, there is a clear ranking in the public opinion: There is the first class Olympic event followed by a second class Paralympic competition. Even though the London 2012 Paralympic Games enjoyed great public awareness and important media coverage, at least in Great Britain, there is still an enormous difference between the public impact of the Olympics and the Paralympics. Furthermore, the fact that successful Paralympic Champions like Oscar Pistorius and the Polish table tennis player Natalia Partyka have been eager to participate in the Olympic Games, even though they had little chance to win medals, shows that the concept of parallel/equal Games is flawed. Even though the Games 2012 and 2014 where milestones concerning the participation of women, the Pistorius case during the London Games and the context of homophobia in Sochi raised new issues of diversity and alterity. Sochi questioned, once again, the attitude of the IOC against human rights violations in host countries and the case of Pistorius challenged the traditional categorizing system in sports. These concerns opened a new debate about today’s relevance and meanings of sports in open and inclusive societies. As the leading educational and moral institution in sports that claims to contribute to the betterment of the world and to promote sport without discrimination of any kind, the IOC should be at the forefront of this debate by its reflections and actions. 142 Olympic Idea Nowadays How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement? Benoit Seguin (Canada) University of Ottawa (Canada) The London 2012 and Sochi 2014 Olympic Games supported and changed the Olympic Movement in different ways. As one of the best-known cities in the world, London certainly added prestige to the Olympic brand by successfully blending British-rich culture within all aspects of the Games. Sochi, on the other hand, provided the Olympic Movement with the opportunity to connect and strengthen its presence amongst hundreds of millions of winter sports enthusiasts living in Russia and neighboring countries. The globally recognized landmarks of London and the spectacular scenery (coast and mountains) of Sochi combined with the high level of enthusiasm from the citizens of both cities created the backdrop for extraordinary athletic performances. This provided television networks as well as other media highly meaningful and entertaining content (images, human stories, celebration of cultures, etc.) thus offering the hundreds of millions of viewers high quality programming. Was the record-breaking number of people tuning-in to watch the Games an indication of the high level of interest in the Games from the public (e.g. high level of brand loyalty) which will likely result in more revenue from broadcasting rights fees in the future? London will also be hosting many international events in the future and its strategy for hosting events will continue to support the Olympic Movement for years to come. On the other hand, Sochi’s exceptional infrastructure will offer Winter Sport Federations new options for hosting events, thus increasing their ability to leverage interests between potential hosts. The addition of new Olympic events such as slopestyle ski and snowboard in Sochi supported the Olympic Movement’s need to appeal to a younger audience and make the brand relevant to a wider audience. The London Games also changed the delivery of Olympic content by being tagged as the first truly ‘digital Games’ (3D, HD and ultra-HD coverage) and Olympic content on tablets, mobile 143 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) phones, radio and television around the world. London and Sochi provided unprecedented availability of niche sports and highlighted packages that changed the way sport is delivered and experienced by Olympic fans. The Games in London and Sochi also triggered serious concerns for the Olympic Movement, at least in the short and medium terms. The huge costs associated with hosting these two Games (although not necessarily all sports related) may take the Olympic Movement back to 1976, when the Olympic discourse was centered on white elephants, huge financial burden for taxpayers and corruption. As a result, after the Montreal Games, only one city remained in the bid race and the IOC had little choice but to agree to the conditions put forth by the bid committee (i.e. Games to be privately funded). However, such extreme situations often are triggers for changes. This may be the case for the Olympic Movement today following London and Sochi. The Olympic Games are less appealing and cities are either removing their bids or simply opting not to go forward with a planned bid. Thus, the risk of selecting a city that may otherwise not be considered suitable for the Olympic Movement increases considerably. This in turn could diminish the interests of sponsors and broadcasters especially if the locations selected are susceptible to public criticism. With the emergence of social media as a platform to mobilize activist groups and reach a huge amount of people anywhere in the world, choosing a city that may not be supportive of Olympic ideals could create huge problems for the IOC and the Olympic Movement. While social media is in a rather early stage of development, its ability to mobilize a large number of people and put pressure on various Olympic stakeholders (e.g. sponsors, broadcasters, athletes) was demonstrated in the months leading up to Sochi, when the Russian Government passed a law banning the “propaganda of nontraditional sexual orientation to minors”. Regardless, the possibility of having few cities bidding for the Olympics prompted the Olympic Movement to review its model for hosting the Games in the future. Another contentious legislation passed for both Games was the one aimed at protecting sponsors from ambush marketing. While the consequences of such legal measures are yet to be fully understood, it raises serious concerns around the public’s rights to freedom of expression. In addition, it may prevent athletes and sport organizations from sharing compelling stories with the public, thus impacting their ability to raise much-needed funds from sponsorships. The negative publicity resulting from anti-ambush efforts in London brought public attention to an issue that is linked to commercialization and may be causing more damage to the Olympic brand than good. Similarly, the IOC’s strict control and enforcement over the athletes participating in the Sochi’s Games (e.g. Rule 40) created resentment from many athletes and also brought negative publicity to the Games. Preventing athletes from displaying compassion for a fellow athlete by wearing some sort of an insignia may be aligned with the Olympic Charter, but difficult to understand from the public’s perspective (e.g. defending the un-defendable). 144 Olympic Idea Nowadays How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement? Lamartine DaCosta Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) Historically the Olympic Games have been an international values-led cultural and social achievement. Thus far, in the 1990s I had proposed for the historical reinterpretation of the Olympic values, the framework of “process philosophy” to follow up the continuing changes toward an adaptation to external influences into the Olympic Games and their partner organizations (DaCosta, 1998). Later, in 2005, Dikaia Chatziefstathiou demonstrated “that Olympism may be defined, not as a set of immutable values, but as a process for consensus construction in terms of values in the world of global sport”, confirming the hypothesis issued in 1998. This understanding today might as well present itself as opposed to the common vision toward the Olympic Movement’s future, which would be dependent on the capability to reinforce its organization facing external challenges. However, managing mixedmotives situations usually found in international relationships, the IOC deals with ambivalences by its all-embracing kinds of mediation. But ambivalent approaches usually demand clarifications and so Olympic values may be able to legitimate those mediations. Having in mind this process of legitimacy, values-led interventions may become acceptable and normative to stakeholders of the Olympic Movement. In my view, legitimacy is the synthesis of the search of the IOC towards the continuation of the Olympic Games’ existence and development (DaCosta, 2013). In this concern, the implicit nationalism of London 2012 and the explicit disrespect for human rights of Sochi 2014 were mostly a test to the IOC’s legitimation at present times, just taking into account two clear examples of misleading value-based management. 145 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) Unsurprisingly, Preuss, Schütte, Könecke and DaCosta (2014) surveying “suggestions to keep the Olympic Movement alive” found that most of the consulted Olympic scholars (n=190) “set focus on Olympic values” as the preferable option among 13 choices. For those respondents the Olympic values might as well be associated with the Games as a matter of “good governance”. These indications imply that 2016 Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro will continue to test the IOC value-based legitimacy as far as the governance of this mega-event presents the risk of public opposition, as experienced by the cities of Graubünden, Munich, Vienna or Stockholm. References DaCosta, L. (1998) Olympism and the equilibrium of man. In Mueller, N. (ed.), Coubertin et l'Olympisme: questions pour l'avenir: Le Havre 1897-1997. Rapport du congrès du 17 au 20 septembre 1997 a l'Université du Havre. Lausanne: Comité International Pierre de Coubertin, p. 188 – 199. Chatziefstathiou, D. (2005) The Changing Nature of the Ideology of Olympism in the Modern Olympic Era. Doctoral Thesis submitted to Loughborough University – UK. DaCosta, L. (2013) Future Mega-events Cities. Paper presented at the “Olympic Legacies: International Conference Impacts of Mega-Events on Cities” 4-6 September 2013, University of East London. Preuss, H., Schütte, N., Könecke, T. & DaCosta, L. (2014). Olympic Ideals as seen by Olympic Scholars and Experts. Mainzer Papers on Sports Economics & Management. Working Paper no 1, p. 23 – 24. 146 Olympic Idea Nowadays How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement? Bill Mallon (USA) International Society of Olympic Historians London 2012 took place between Beijing 2008 and Sochi 2014 and, along with Vancouver 2010, helped restore some sanity to host cities’ tendencies to spend more and more money, with no regard to the legacy of structures being built or what would become of them. The economics of an Olympic Games are always difficult to fathom fully, because there are both operating costs and the infrastructural costs that cities undertake on projects they hope to subsume within the Olympic finances. But the numbers that are floated for Beijing 2008 – upwards of $40 billion (US) – and Sochi 2014 – usually quoted at $51 billion (US) – are positively frightening for host cities. Further both Beijing and Sochi built infrastructure and stadia with no good proposed plans for their future use. Many of the stadia in Beijing have already been described as white elephants, and now, only three months after Sochi, the Russian government has had to forgive property tax payments on several of the Sochi / Adler buildings because they are not used and they have no possible way to raise money to pay property taxes. London 2012 and Vancouver 2010 both built structures within a reasonable budget for a modern Olympic Games. Further, London 2012 made extensive plans about using temporary structures and how they would re-use many of the other stadia they built. The same is true of Vancouver. While many international sports administrators may not like the fact that the Vancouver speed skating oval was changed to a recreational facility, the fact is that it would not have paid for itself as a speed skating oval and would have cost the city and the province significant upkeep costs. The problem of host cities overspending with no regards to future use of stadia has become more important as the IOC finds itself having difficulty getting cities to bid for future Olympic Games. Many recent potential host cities have had citizens’ referenda in which the citizens have voted against bidding to host an Olympic Games, fearful of the costs involved, often money that could be better spent in those cities or countries 147 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) on other projects. As this is written, one of Oslo’s political parties has voted against the Oslo 2022 bid, the Krakow 2022 bid will soon undergo a Polish referendum, and with the unrest in the Ukraine, only two cities may remain in the running for the 2022 Winter Olympics. And in related international sport, Hanoi recently turned down the chance to host the Asian Games, after they had been selected as the host. So what London 2012 did supports the idea of an Olympic Games at a reasonable price and with excellent planning for the future of the city and what the Olympic Games can bring to that city. What Sochi 2014 did was an abomination of the Olympic Ideals, by forcing the citizens of Russia to spend their tax dollars at the whim and mercy of their government, and especially Vladimir Putin. While the Sochi Olympics were well-run and the facilities were beautiful, at what price? What will become of them? What will become of Adler and Krasnaya Polyana, the two cities essentially built from scratch simply to host a two-week party and sporting event? Krasnaya Polyana was built with an eye to it becoming a top-level ski resort, but how will that work? Getting into Russia is not easy, as it requires a visa. What European family, looking to a ski vacation, will choose that route over something in Switzerland, Austria, or France, with free and easy access? Can the citizens of Russia be expected to support Krasnaya Polyana as a ski resort and destination by themselves? London 2012 has been described by many in the media as a model for all future Summer Olympic Games host cities. The Games were beautifully run, the nation, the city, and the citizens wanted to have the Olympics there. The Olympics were conducted at a reasonable cost with superb planning for the future legacy the Games and the facilities would leave. In contrast, Sochi 2014, while a beautiful two-week sporting event and party, encompassed all that was bad about governments not listening to their citizens but simply putting on a show as a festival designed to highlight their politicians’ desires, with no thought to the finances involved, or the legacy – or lack thereof – that they would leave. 148 Olympic Idea Nowadays How have London 2012 and Sochi 2014 supported or changed the Olympic Movement? Ana Miragaya Universidade Estacio de Sa, Petropolis (Brazil) To answer this question it is necessary to establish a definition for Olympic Movement. According to the Olympic Charter, the Olympic Movement is “the concerted, organised, universal and permanent action, carried out under the supreme authority of the IOC, of all individuals and entities who are inspired by the values of Olympism” (Olympic Charter, 2013, Fundamental Principles). Its goal is “to contribute to building a peaceful and better world by educating youth people through sport practised in accordance with Olympism and its values" (Olympic Charter, 2013, Rule 1). Considering these statements, it is then possible to observe that neither London 2012 nor Sochi 2014 supported the Olympic Movement as these Games have not brought forward the values of Olympism mentioned in the Olympic Charter or even contributed to the education of the youth worldwide. On the contrary, both editions of the Games have continued to reinforce the already long tradition of making supersized Games with many thousands of athletes, which need billionaire investments in infrastructure and facilities that may become useless to citizens, complex and expensive security systems, costly marketing development, fierce competition for medal count, more technically sophisticated doping tests, more hours of transmission, greater number of sponsors not at all related to sport or education, use of the Games for political purposes among many undesirable features which render the host city and country a deficient Olympic legacy. The Olympic Games have become indeed a very big business. On the other hand, London 2012 and Sochi 2014 have contributed to change the Olympic Movement in the sense that both events have kept the Olympic Movement far from its original sources. There has been a visible change of values since the first Olympic Charter was written (1898) and published in 1908 by the French educator 149 Emilio Fernandez Peña, Holger Preus & Lamartine Pereira Dacosta (Orgs) Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Xavier Ramon & Ana Miragaya (Eds.) Pierre de Coubertin, the founder of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and renovator of the Olympic Games, who had ethical values and high ideals as sources of inspiration. The original objectives of the IOC were (1) to make sure that the Games were regularly celebrated; (2) to make this celebration more perfect each time to deserve its glorious past and delivered according to the high ideals which inspired its renovators and (3) to provoke or to organize all the manifestations and, in general, to take all the proper measures to guide modern athleticism within desirable ways (Coubertin, 2008). The 2013 Olympic Charter mentions values very clearly, but practice shows different. However, the IOC seems to have perceived the distance the IOC itself has taken from its original sources as, in 2007, the IOC instituted the Youth Olympic Games (YOG): “an event distinct from other youth sports events, as they also integrate a unique Culture and Education Programme (CEP), based around five main themes: Olympism, Social Responsibility, Skills Development, Expression and Well-being and Healthy Lifestyles. Away from the field of play and through a variety of fun and interactive activities, workshops and team-building exercises, the CEP gives the participating athletes the opportunity to learn about the Olympic values, explore other cultures and develop the skills to become true ambassadors of their sport”. Is it then possible to consider the YOG the hope for a future new beginning? References COUBERTIN, P. (1908) Comité International Olympique, Annuaire, Règlement, pg.7 available at <http://www.olympic.org/Documents/Olympic%20Charter/Olympic_Charter_through_time/1 908-Charte_Olympique.pdf> INTERNATIONAL OLYMPIC COMMITTEE (2013). Olympic Charter, pg.9. Available at <http://www.olympic.org/Documents/olympic_charter_en.pdf>. 150