Is that Sporting?

Mid-way through 2004 there was an explosion of exceptional international sport, with the Athens Olympics in August following swiftly on the heels of the European Cup in Portugal. Tapping into the mass audience and support for these competitions were several events that aimed to promote awareness of social problems evident across the globe and raise money for charitable causes. The fundraiser Sport Relief in the UK, had raised over £11 million by August, for projects in Guatemala, Tanzania, Uganda, India and Pakistan, as well as the UK.80

Sport-related fundraising is not a new phenomenon. Marathons have been particularly successful at motivating thousands of individuals to take part in sport while raising money for charity. Over £134 million had been raised by participants in the London marathon alone since its first race in 1981.81 However, recent years have witnessed a rise in projects occurring in developing countries financed by sports institutions, rather than fans or fundraisers. The biggest players are sporting confederations themselves, such as the Union of European Football Associations (UEFA) and its global guiding force, the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA).

Both FIFA and UEFA have funded international development organizations since the mid 1990s. UEFA has given CHF 6.1 million to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) since 1997, of which over CHF 1 million has gone to 'Mine Action' - a project not connected to football, or indeed sport, in any apparent way.82 Additionally, money raised by the fines imposed on teams in UEFA's Euro 2004 went to ICRC's 'Protect Children in War' campaign.

One project that appears more closely linked to the impacts of sport is FIFA's "partnership" with UNICEF, for which over a million US dollars has been provided to combat child labour since 1997. However, despite a decade of campaigning by NGOs against the sport industry's role in perpetuating child labour through ignoring or not doing enough about the problem of supply chain management and standard enforcement, it is estimated that in 2004, 75% of the world's hand stitched footballs will have been made in Pakistan, notorious for child labour.83 In response to media attention, FIFA introduced a Code of Conduct in 1996 aiming to protect child labourers, although by its own admission, only 4% of the world's footballs are covered by this code - the rest having been made in workshops throughout Asia that are not officially contracted to FIFA.84 Nevertheless, pressure from NGOs on the issue has been consistent against all major sporting bodies. In June, Oxfam, along with the Clean Clothes Campaign and the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) launched another attack on the International Olympic Committee (IOC) for ignoring its moral and legal responsibility towards workers in factories that produce Olympic merchandise.85 The report states, '[so] intrinsically linked is the practice of sport with the sports-brands that any taint on the industry's reputation also stains the reputation of the sports institutions. Yet the sporting world - apart from a few exceptions - has done very little to call for change on the part of the sportswear companies'.86

Are the contributions of sporting confederations to development organizations a simple response to pressure from civil society activists, or is it more complex than that? UEFA's motivation for contributing to development projects is given on its website: 'By adopting a flexible and clear charity policy, UEFA is supporting the belief that football should be used as a force for broader benefit within society, using its potential to influence attitudes and behaviour beyond the confines of the stadium.'87 And its potential to influence is certainly huge. The 31 matches played in Euro 2004 drew some 80 million viewers worldwide, which was over 15% more than the comparative statistics for Euro 2000.88

Of course, sport has long been recognised as an activity beneficial to individual development. In addition, scholars and sportsmen alike have connected sport with community development. The link between sport and community development goes back at least as far as the modern Olympic Games. Pierre de Coubertin, founder of the modern Olympics, was just as interested in the promotion of peace amongst nations.89 Indeed, if sport transcends cultural barriers, then football as the world's "beautiful game" is commonly acknowledged as the best barrier-breaker there is. The example of German and British troops briefly laying their weapons on Christmas Day 1914 for a game of football and a moment of surreal relief from the surrounding chaos reinforces the idea that sport, on account of its universalism, can indeed build bridges between communities in a way that most other cultural activities cannot.90 But tragically for all concerned, war continued the following day and the role of sport did nothing to stop it. The question therefore remains; can sport promote peace and development?

The idea that sport promotes development and peace is in direct opposition to the national or ethnic identity that is central to international or regional competition. One only has to consider the British press in a World Cup year to witness the nationalist fervour that the sport inspires and feeds upon. Yet there has been a strange development in recent years, because the increased migration of players is, arguably, undermining simplistic nationalist and regionalist sentiment amongst supporters.91 When Senegal beat its former colonial master France in the 2002 World Cup, none of its winning squad played for Senegalese local teams - they had all been playing in France in the season preceding the games.

However, the globalization of the sport goes much further than the movement of its players. Football is, after all, big business - in 1999 alone Americans spent a whopping $763 per capita on sporting goods.92 In a game where supporters become consumers, FIFA's involvement with UNICEF or UEFA's with ICRC could be seen as part of a strategy to expand the future consumer base into countries that have no historical or prior cultural connection with football.

The cultural connection provides interesting fodder for social theorists concerned with cultural hegemony and the globalization of culture, discussed in the previous season of this annual review.93 By Gramsci's definition, whereby culture cannot be divorced from ideology and hegemonic status is achieved not through force but through acquiescence and consent, sport is achieving a powerful status. The globalization of the Olympic Games, in which "western" sports undoubtedly dominate, undermines the power of local sports for the sake of those with the biggest mass audience. Moreover, its close association with western products, and thus values and lifestyle, add to its westernizing influence. In football it is the western leagues, such as the English Premiership, European Championship, that are marketed globally, along with their star players and sponsors' brands. The globalizing of western sports can therefore be viewed as part of a process of marketing to the world those ways of life and aspirations that serve particular commercial (and, perhaps, political) interests.

The irony is that despite the charitable activity of football institutions, football has recently become the conduit for a flow of money from poor countries to rich ones. The purchase of Chelsea Football Club by the Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich illustrates this well. Chukotka, the north-eastern province of Russia in which Abramovich is governor, was declared bankrupt in June. Given serious concerns about the way Russian oligarchs came to own previously state-owned corporations, and the low to non-existent levels of tax these companies now pay, one cannot help but wonder whether the $233 million Abramovich has spent on assembling his star players might have been better spent covering some of the $320 million debts of the poverty-stricken region. Meanwhile, a bid by the Thai Prime Minister, Thaksin Shinawatra, and a later offer from Thai media tycoon Paiboon Damrongchaitham to buy a third of Liverpool Football Club with sums well in excess of £60 million, is further testament to this rather odd reverse flow of money as well as the increasing cultural power of western football clubs.

Compared to these amounts of money, FIFA and UEFA's attempts to enhance social development seem to fall well short of the desired finishing line. Perhaps it is time for the sports industry to follow calls from civil society activists as other industries have, and attempt to shift away from philanthropy towards an increased accountability of the entire industry.