Defining a problem to fit the solution: A neo-institutional explanation for legitimising the bid for the 2016 Lillehammer winter Youth Olympic Games

Abstract

This article discusses the successful bid for the 2016 Lillehammer winter Youth Olympic Games (YOG) and its incorporation within the broader youth sport strategy within organised sport in Norway. Although it is widely accepted that the argument that major sports events are a solution to problems of low levels of involvement in sport is not generally supported by evidence Norwegian sport organisations used this argument as a primary justification for hosting the YOG. The aim of the research is to investigate: a) why NIF used this argument even though there was so little evidence to support its validity; and b) how and why this seemingly contradictory argument was successfully 'sold' to the public. The research was guided by the methodological approach of discourse analysis and the theoretical framework of the neo-institutionalist concept of legitimacy. Based on this analysis I show how the institutionalised rhetoric of the Norwegian youth sport policy (YSP) adopted by the Norwegian Olympic Committee and Confederation of Sports (NIF) became the main argument for the YOG bid. Further findings show that rather than responding to the youth sport participation problem, NIF used the development of youth sport as a convenient rationale to bid for the YOG in order to secure legitimacy from two of its main stakeholders -the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the Norwegian government. Rather than hosting the YOG as solution to a youth sport participation problem, NIF used the institutionalised rhetoric of the YSP, defining a problem to fit the solution.

Sport policy analysis revisited: the sport policy process as an interlinked chain of legitimating acts

“…From Fahlén et al (2015), for example, we know that the SSC simultaneously seeks legitimacy in the policy evaluation phase. Similarly, our illustrations on the policy formulation (Strittmatter 2016) and policy implementation (Waldahl and Skille 2016) phases together show how the same organisation (NIF) seeks legitimacy in different phases. Finally, as our example building on Fahlén (2017b) demonstrates, local authorities (LAs) seek legitimacy in the policy evaluation phase.…”

“…Less attention has been paid to the legitimating act as an element in policy formulation, the phase in which policy objectives are set and solutions and policy instruments are selected. One exception in a sport policy context is Strittmatter's (2016) analysis of the Norwegian confederation of sports' (NIF) youth sport policy (YSP). Employing discourse analysis, Strittmatter showed how NIF used the development of youth sport as a convenient rationale to bid for the Youth Olympic Games (YOG) in order to secure legitimacy from two of its main stakeholdersthe International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the Norwegian government.…”

Youth Olympic Games: Using marketing tools to analyse the reality of GCC countries beyond Agenda 2020

“…The last century has observed large-scale sporting events being used as a vehicle to implement political, cultural and social chances (Strittmatter, 2016). Recently, the Youth Olympic Games (YOG) was another mega sport event created to offer more competitive opportunities to athletes and increase the hosting chances for countries around the world.…”

“…As a result, IOC had "to push" National Olympic Committees (NOCs) delegations and other sport organisations to participate in the YOG (Hanstad, Parent and Kristiansen, 2013). On the other side, even with clear issues, authors such as Strittmatter (2016) affirm that YOG can contribute to a positive image of national sports entities, being a tool for enhancing legitimacy rather than as an action to tackle a youth drop-out problem.…”

“…a) The event brings critics around the overtraining of young competitors, risk of injuries, and psychological pressure (Judge et al, 2013); b) As performance pressure could be a reason for dropping out of organised sports, the bid for the YOG can be seen as contradictory for national sports entities if their goal is to increase youth participation (Strittmatter, 2016); c) Previous research shows that Olympic events do not increase mass participation, an argument frequently used by sport politicians and sport managers to justify the hosting of Olympic events (Strittmatter, 2016); d) Not all the National Olympic Committees see the YOG as their top priority event for young athletes;…”