Sport and the Sustainable Development Goals: Where is the policy coherence?

Abstract

The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. This article addresses the urgent need for critical analysis of the relationships between sport and the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) enshrined in the United Nations' global development framework, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Importantly, there has yet to be any substantial academic exploration of the implications of the position accorded to sport as 'an important enabler' of the aims of 2030 Agenda and its broad set of SDGs. In beginning to address this gap, we draw on the concept of policy coherence for two reasons. Firstly, the designation of a specific SDG Target for policy coherence is recognition of its centrality in working towards SDGs that are considered as 'integrated and indivisible'. Secondly, the concept of policy coherence is centred on a dualism that enables holistic examination of both synergies through which the contribution of sport to the SDGs can be enhanced as well as incoherencies by which sport may detract from such outcomes. Our analysis progresses through three examples that focus on the common orientation of the Sport for Development and Peace 'movement' towards education-orientated objectives aligned with SDG 4; potential synergies between sport participation policies and the SDG 3 Target for reducing non-communicable diseases; and practices within professional football in relation to several migration-related SDG Targets. These examples show the relevance of the SDGs across diverse sectors of the sport industry and illustrate complexities within and across countries that make pursuit of comprehensive policy coherence infeasible. Nevertheless, our analyses lead us to encourage both policy makers and researchers to continue to utilise the concept of policy coherence as a valuable lens to identify and consider factors that may enable and constrain various potential contributions of sport to a range of SDGs.

Research on Coordination and Driving Factors of Sports Industry and Regional Sustainable Development—Empirical Research Based on Panel Data of Provinces and Cities in Eastern China

“…It lacks systematic research on regional sustainable development as a whole and deep thinking on the relationship between the sports industry and regional sustainable development in the new era. Lindsey and other scholars pointed out that sport is an "important promoter" of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its sustainable development goals [38]. Therefore, it is necessary and meaningful to carry out relevant research on the relationship between the sports industry and regional sustainable development.…”

Sport and sustainable development in Botswana: towards policy coherence

“…The concept of policy coherence initially gained prominence in the field of international development in the 1990s and early 2000s, but a formal definition of the term has remained elusive. Early on, proponents of policy coherence aimed to improve development outcomes in the global South by countering problems that arose from divergent or incoherent policies in the North [3]. Now, policy coherence is applied to a range of domains outside of international development.…”

Sport and Peacebuilding in Israel/Palestine

“…Proposing a precise definition of peacebuilding is not a straight-forward task. Reychler The term 'Sport for Development and Peace' was readily adopted by international sport federations, international and national non-governmental organizations, national governments and local organisations who saw it as an attractive, low-cost, interventionist tool to foster social cohesion, prevent and reduce conflict and build peace (Burnett, 2015;Darnell and Hayhurst, 2012;Giulianotti, 2011;Lindsey, 2017;Lindsey & Darby, 2018;Lindsey and Grattan 2012;Schulenkorf and Adair, 2013;Svensson & Levine, 2017). The SDP sector is dominated by the 'development' element with 'peace' research focused on those countries in a post-conflict phase and where different communities are seeking greater integration and reconciliation (Gasser & Levinsen, 2004;Giulianotti, 2011;Rookwood & Palmer, 2011;Schulenkorf, 2010;Sterchele, 2013).…”