The corporal dimension of sports-based interventions: Understanding the role of embedded expectations and embodied knowledge in sport policy implementation

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to show how the corporal character of activities commonly provided in sports-based policy interventions has implications for the results of policy implementation. By employing the theoretical concepts of embedded expectations and embodied knowledge, this paper examines how expectations embedded in such activities interact with experiences embodied by the participants and combine in availing or restricting the possibilities for participation – thereby affecting the outcome of policies for increased participation in organised sport. The paper builds on data from a case study of a sports-based intervention that aimed to usher so-called un-associated youth in to participation in regular sport-club activities by offering ‘organised spontaneous sports’ in ‘drop-in’ sessions that focus on the intrinsic characteristics of non-competitive sports and participants’ wishes. Findings from interviews, the intervention’s internal documentation, and observations show how expectations embedded in these activities require a very specific embodied knowledge of the individual participant. Instead of challenging dominant notions of what sport ‘is’ and ‘can be’, the activities reproduce existing preconceptions and, in extension, existing patterns of sport participation instead of supporting the formation of new ones as aimed for by policy makers. The findings are discussed in relation to the wider discussion about policy implementation in sport and highlight the necessity for understanding the content of the activities offered in sports-based interventions relative to the previous experiences of the pronounced recipients.

Exploring Critical Alternatives for Youth Development through Lifestyle Sport: Surfing and Community Development in Aotearoa/New Zealand

“…Yet, despite these promising examples, lifestyle sports have yet to garner significant attention from the broader sport for development community [9], and programs continue to rely on mainstream sports, particularly competitive team sports [39,57]. Consequently, one intention for this paper is to bolster the evidence base on which these emerging discussions on "action sport for development" are based.…”

Inside-out and outside-in: Applying the concept of conventions in the analysis of policy implementation through sport clubs

“…The cognitive structures of persons with power lead to social structures (materialistically manifested in sport venues) which, in turn, influence other peoples' cognitive structures. A very materialistic effect of such advocacy work is, therefore, that all sport pitches need to be measured and designed according to the standards required by competitive sport (see also Fahlén, 2011Fahlén, , 2015a. All kinds of sport pitches, and especially those for football, handball and basketball, are marked according to technical specifications supplied by the relevant government department (which has the money) and the sport federations (which govern the rules).…”

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

“…Legitimacy is recognised as an important aspect in many studies that examine the sport policy process (e.g., Kikulis et al 1992, Chalip 1995, Hinings et al 1996, Kikulis 2000, Houlihan and White 2002, Thibault and Babiak 2005, Steen-Johnsen and Hanstad 2008, Andersen and Ronglan 2012, Jedlicka 2012, Stenling 2014a, Hasselgård and Straume 2015, Ronglan 2015, Sam and Ronglan 2016, Stenling and Fahlén 2016, Stenling and Sam 2017, Strittmatter and Skille 2017, Fahlén 2017a, Strittmatter 2017a). However, research on legitimacy tends to be carried out in two relatively separate streams, each with their own assumptions, theories, and foci.…”