National Success in Elite Sport: Exploring the Factors that Lead to Success 9783031389962, 9783031389979

Table of contents :
Introduction
References
Contents
About the Authors
List of Figures
List of Tables
1 Measurement of Countries’ Performances and Successes in Elite Sport: The World Ranking of Countries in Elite Sport
1.1 Introduction
1.1.1 Universality Coefficients
1.1.2 Remarks
1.1.3 Popularity Coefficient
1.2 What Competitions Were Chosen in Each Sport?
1.3 What Changes Did the WRCES Methodology Bring?
References
2 Literature Review on the Analysis of the Factors Behind Countries’ Success in Elite Sport
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Macro-Level Factors
2.2.1 Political Factors
2.2.2 Economic Factors
2.2.3 Demographic Factors
2.2.4 Geographic Factors
2.2.5 Cultural Factors
A- National
B- Social
C- Familial
2.3 Meso-Level Factors
2.4 Micro-Level Factors
References
3 Correlations Between Sport Results, Population, GDP, Area, and Research Rankings
3.1 Introduction
References
4 Why Do Population and GDP Per Capita not Have an Impact on Countries’ Performances in Elite Sport?
4.1 Introduction
References
5 What Are the Factors Leading to Countries’ Success in Elite Sport and How Are They Related?
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Natural Factors Come First
5.3 Political and Cultural Interests and Funding Come Next
5.4 Transparency in the Sport System and Expertise Will Finalize Success
References
6 Expertise of the NSGBs, NOCs, NSFs, and SAs in Implementing Elite Sport Policies
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Developing Mass Participation
6.3 Organizing Grassroots and Youth Competitions
6.4 Improving the Skills of the Athletes’ Entourage
6.5 Setting Up the Environment That Will Optimize Success at the Elite Level
References
Conclusion
Reference
Index

Citation preview

National Success in Elite Sport Exploring the Factors that Lead to Success

Nadim Nassif Michel Raspaud

National Success in Elite Sport

Nadim Nassif · Michel Raspaud

National Success in Elite Sport Exploring the Factors that Lead to Success

Nadim Nassif Notre Dame University—Louaize Zouk Mosbeh, Lebanon

Michel Raspaud Grenoble Alpes University Saint-Martin-d’Hères, France

ISBN 978-3-031-38996-2 ISBN 978-3-031-38997-9 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38997-9 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Cover illustration: © Melisa Hasan This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

Introduction

Winning in international elite sport competitions goes beyond the collection of medals, prizes, cups, or trophies. It is a matter of national pride, a contest to show the superiority of a country over the others. Indeed, since antiquity, from 776 B.C to 394 A.D, the Ancient Olympic Games were opposing the Greek city-states, prolonging their military conflicts through athletic non-armed events (Golden, 1998, p. 24). When restoring the Olympic Games in 1896, the Baron Pierre de Coubertin was also driven by a political motive. He grew up in a world where France, which dominated Europe since the seventeenth century, was losing its position to Great Britain (GB) and Germany. He was deeply concerned about the fate of France and became involved in sport primarily driven by his wider patriotic interests. By recreating the Olympics, De Coubertin wanted to rebuild the international role of France by making it the creator of a worldwide movement (Guttman, 2002, pp. 7–20). Although acknowledging that sport was a powerful tool of national identity, he also believed that the desire to compete and win could be civilized by the friendly competition that sport proposes to individuals and nations. By the time the Games were introduced to Stockholm in 1912, the idea of a competition between nations for the maximum number of medals was firmly established. They became, as the theory of social Darwinism defines, a test of national virility. This pattern has continued to be a feature of Olympic and other international competitions right up to the present day (Guttman, 2002, pp. 7–20). In what became a v

vi

INTRODUCTION

famous phrase, George Orwell defined international sport as “a war minus the shooting” (Beck, 2013). Sport, therefore, reproduces the geopolitical competitions between nations in a supposedly “friendly” environment. The Olympic idealists viewed the role of sport as a way of reducing international tension and promoting goodwill between nations. The reality, however, will be very different (Guttman, 2002, pp. 7–20). There has always been a tension between ideal and reality, between the international peace and progress, which Coubertin proclaimed as well as the fiercely competitive national ambitions of the teams of athletes who took part (Guttman, 2002, pp. 7–20). This quest for winning at all cost has sometimes led to different kinds of unethical behaviors in the sport movement such as doping (Herzog, 2017), match-fixing (Huggins, 2018), or emotional abuse of young elite athletes (Gervis & Dunn, 2004). This book, however, is not aimed at analyzing the sociological phenomena that made sport the arena of political struggle, but at proposing a framework of analysis that would identify the proper combination of the macro-, meso-, and micro-level factors leading to countries’ success in international competitions. To be able to propose this holistic model, we wanted to measure the performances of the 206 countries that are part of the international sport movement. In fact, all scholars that have worked on the analysis of the factors behind countries’ successes in elite sport have used the Olympic Medal Table as a starting point of their performance evaluation. But given that many countries do not win medals (55% of the total number of countries did not win medals in the last Winter and Summer Olympics to date, 2020 and 2022), we believe that the Olympic Medal Table cannot give a large sample that will allow scholars to build a solid framework. For this purpose, we chose to base our studies on the results of the World Ranking of Countries in Elite Sport (WRCES) which proposes a methodology characterized by the following main characteristics (Nassif, 2018): – A computational model that gives each country its share of points in at least one sport and consequently its world ranking based on the total number of points that particular country has obtained in all the sports in which it participates. – The introduction of coefficients of universality and media popularity for each sport.

INTRODUCTION

vii

Given that the WRCES allows the ranking of all countries participating in international competitions, we believe that comparative studies will have the potential to be more holistic, and therefore, accurately identify the factors leading to countries’ success in elite sport. The methodology of the WRCES will be further explained in Chapter 1. Chapter 2 will cover the literature review of the studies done on the analysis of the factors behind success in elite sport. Researches on the macro- (political, economic, demographic, geographic, and cultural), meso- (governance, participation, talent identification, athletes support, scientific research, choices of sport to fund, institutionalization…), and micro-levels (which are characterized by the stakeholders of the athletes’ close environment) will be cited and constitute the references on which our investigation will be based. This investigation will start in Chapter 3, with correlation calculi between the WRCES, the population, Gross Domestic Product (GDP), GDP per capita, area, population density, and research output rankings for the years 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019. We studied these calculations to measure the impact of the macro-level factors first (population, GDP, GDP per capita, area, and population density) that were identified by researchers in the field. We then calculated the correlation between the WRCES and research output to reveal the extent to which scientific advancement can improve the meso- and micro-level strategies. The results obtained in Chapter 3 will allow for the identification of the main factors leading to countries’ success in elite sport. In Chapters 4 and 5, we will see how these variables are interrelated in order to draw the holistic model; the purpose of this book. The main contributions aimed for, in this work, were providing all countries with a precise measurement of their performances in sport first, then giving them a general idea on the variables they must consider when implementing an elite sport policy. This is why sport management is the science used in this work. According to Hoye and Parent (2016, p. 5), there are nine fundamentals of sport management: sport governance, strategic management, organizational structures, human resource management, leadership, organizational culture, financial management, sport marketing, and performance management. As this book aims to consider the general factors that determine the establishment of a national sport policy, this book is related to the sub-academic field of sport governance, which Hoy and Parent (2016, p. 10) believe “deals with issues of

viii

INTRODUCTION

policy and direction for improving organizational performance, as well as ensuring statutory and fiduciary compliance by organizational members”. This work aims to contribute to the enhancement of the knowledge of undergraduate, graduate, and post-graduate students studying sport management courses. It also intends to improve the skills of professionals working in the sport industry, particularly those involved in competitive and elite sport.

References Beck, P. J. (2013). ‘War minus the shooting’: George Orwell on International Sport and the Olympics. Sport in History, 33(1), 72–94. Gervis, M., & Dunn, N. (2004). The emotional abuse of elite child athletes by their coaches. Child Abuse Review: Journal of the British Association for the Study and Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect, 13(3), 215–223. Golden, M., & Mark, G. (1998). Sport and society in ancient Greece. Cambridge University Press. Guttmann, A. (2002). The Olympics, a history of the modern games (Vol. 14). University of Illinois Press. Herzog, W. (2017). Fairness in Olympic sports: How can we control the increasing complexity of doping use in high performance sports? Journal of Sport and Health Science, 6(1), 47. Hoye, R., & Parent, M. M. (Eds.). (2016). The SAGE handbook of sport management. Sage. Huggins, M. (2018). Match-fixing: A historical perspective. The International Journal of the History of Sport, 35(2–3), 123–140. Nassif, N. (2018). World Ranking of Countries in Elite Sport. Rivista di Diritto ed Economia dello Sport, 14(2), 55–75.

Contents

1

2

Measurement of Countries’ Performances and Successes in Elite Sport: The World Ranking of Countries in Elite Sport 1.1 Introduction 1.1.1 Universality Coefficients 1.1.2 Remarks 1.1.3 Popularity Coefficient 1.2 What Competitions Were Chosen in Each Sport? 1.3 What Changes Did the WRCES Methodology Bring? References

1 1 15 16 18 24 27 29

Literature Review on the Analysis of the Factors Behind Countries’ Success in Elite Sport 2.1 Introduction 2.2 Macro-Level Factors 2.2.1 Political Factors 2.2.2 Economic Factors 2.2.3 Demographic Factors 2.2.4 Geographic Factors 2.2.5 Cultural Factors 2.3 Meso-Level Factors 2.4 Micro-Level Factors References

33 33 34 34 40 42 44 45 53 61 63

ix

x

CONTENTS

3

Correlations Between Sport Results, Population, GDP, Area, and Research Rankings 3.1 Introduction References

69 69 74

Why Do Population and GDP Per Capita not Have an Impact on Countries’ Performances in Elite Sport? 4.1 Introduction References

77 77 97

4

5

6

What Are the Factors Leading to Countries’ Success in Elite Sport and How Are They Related? 5.1 Introduction 5.2 Natural Factors Come First 5.3 Political and Cultural Interests and Funding Come Next 5.4 Transparency in the Sport System and Expertise Will Finalize Success References Expertise of the NSGBs, NOCs, NSFs, and SAs in Implementing Elite Sport Policies 6.1 Introduction 6.2 Developing Mass Participation 6.3 Organizing Grassroots and Youth Competitions 6.4 Improving the Skills of the Athletes’ Entourage 6.5 Setting Up the Environment That Will Optimize Success at the Elite Level References

101 101 102 104 108 111 113 113 114 116 119 122 140

Conclusion

145

Reference

149

Index

151

About the Authors

Nadim Nassif is an Associate Professor in Physical Education and Sports at Notre Dame University—Louaize (NDU), Lebanon. His research interests encompass sport history, coaching, and sport management. Aside of his academic career, he is also an international coach in both futsal and Mixed Martial Arts. He was appointed as a physical education ambassador by the International Federation of Physical Education and Sports (FIEPS). He is also a consultant for the International Mixed Martial Arts Federation (IMMAF). Michel Raspaud is Emeritus Professor at Université Grenoble Alpes. He is a founding member of the French Society of Sport Sociology, and board member of the journal “Sciences sociales et sport”. His research focuses on sport policy and sport organizations, mainly related to national and international football, mega sport events, mountaineering, and high altitude sport tourism destinations. He published five books (two of them as co-author), articles in peer reviewed journals, and chapters in books.

xi

List of Figures

Fig. 1.1 Fig. 2.1 Fig. 4.1 Fig. 5.1 Fig. 6.1 Fig. 6.2 Fig. 6.3

Points computation by sport, discipline, and event Interpretation of the Chinese elite sport system defined by Zheng et al. (2019) Sources of funding of the different sectors of the sport movement Order of the factors leading to countries’ success in elite sport Correlation between participation, fan base, and results Actions required from the stakeholders of the national sport movement a. The GGIFTE model of countries’ success in elite sport. b. Expertise needed by the different stakeholders to implement coordinated policies to succeed in elite sport

15 58 91 110 129 138

139

xiii

List of Tables

Table 1.1 Table 1.2 Table 1.3 Table 1.4 Table 1.5 Table 1.6 Table 1.7

Table 1.8 Table 1.9 Table 1.10 Table 1.11 Table 1.12 Table 1.13

Example of the false inference of the Olympic Medal Table methodology Glossary (IOC, 2020) Points classification within an event, discipline, or sport (Nassif, 2018) Example of ranking and scaled points granting for a country in an event A (Nassif, 2018) Sample of disciplines in which the “summing-up rule” of events is being applied Sample of sports in which the “summing-up rule” of disciplines is being applied Sample of sports in which the “summing-up rule” of events in sports without different disciplines is being applied Example of the attribution of universality coefficients in the 2019 WRCES Universality coefficients of the different disciplines within the sport of cycling Total number of popularity points for men football in the 2018 WRCES Popularity coefficients of the sport of football and its disciplines Total coefficient for the sport of handball Points won by the USA in the different disciplines of Aquatics in the 2019 WRCES

4 7 12 13 14 14

15 17 18 20 22 22 23

xv

xvi

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.14

Table 1.15 Table 1.16

Table 1.17

Table 1.18

Table 1.19

Table 2.1 Table 2.2 Table 2.3a

Table 2.3b

Table 3.1.

Table 4.1

Table 4.2

Points won by the USA in aquatics after summing up the points it won in the different aquatics disciplines in the 2019 WRCES Samples of total number of points of the top three countries in the 2019 Final WRCES Comparison between Egypt and Ethiopia’s results in the 2016 WRCES and the 2014–2016 combined Olympic Medal Tables Comparison between Egypt and Ethiopia’s results in the 2018 WRCES and the 2016–2018 combined Olympic Medal Tables Comparison between Argentina, Norway, and Hungary’s results in the 2016 WRCES and the 2014–2016 combined Olympic Medal Tables Comparison between Argentina, Norway, and Hungary’s results in the 2018 WRCES and the 2016–2018 combined Olympic Medal Tables Sport and religion in West Germany (Luschen & Lenk, quoted by Guttmann, 1978, p. 83) Sport and religion at the Olympic games (Luschen & Lenk, quoted by Guttmann, 1978, p. 83) Interpretation of Miege’s (2011, pp. 65–66) survey on sports organizations in the western member-states of the European Union (EU) Interpretation of Miege’s (2011, pp. 65–66) survey on sports organizations in the Western member- States of the EU Results of the correlations between the WRCES, population, GDP, GDP per capita, area, population density, and research output for the years 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 Number of Thai fighters in the top 10 of the Muay Thai professional rankings in the different weight categories in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 Countries with the higher average heights (men and women included), population, WRCES 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 ranks (the average height did not change significantly between 2009 and 2019. For the population, we took the average of 2014 and 2019)

23 23

28

28

28

28 50 50

56

57

72

84

87

LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.3

Table 4.4 Table 4.5

Table 6.1

Table 6.2 Table 6.3 Table 6.4 Table 6.5 Table 6.6

Countries with the lowest average heights (men and women included), population, WRCES 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 ranks (the average height did not change significantly between 2009 and 2019. For the population, we took the average of 2014 and 2019) Comparison between sporting goods and other product markets (Statista, 2020) Comparisons between Lebanon, Jamaica, and Estonia in the years 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 (The sports budgets of these countries were similar in those six years. For the population, we took the average of these six years) Percentage of the total number of sports in which Lebanon, Slovenia, and Croatia were ranked for the 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 WRCES editions 2019 WRCES ranks of Lebanon, Slovenia, and Croatia and their comparisons with their 2019 GDP ranking Agents in charge of developing grassroots and youth sports Impact of universities on the different agents of the sport system List of the wealthiest national professional sport leagues Top 20 countries in terms of fan base for the years 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019

xvii

88 90

95

118 118 120 123 126 129

CHAPTER 1

Measurement of Countries’ Performances and Successes in Elite Sport: The World Ranking of Countries in Elite Sport

Abstract Scholars who explored the factors behind countries’ success in elite sport have all referred to the Olympic Medal table to measure this type of success. This chapter first draws attention to the inaccuracies of the Olympic Medal Table then gives a detailed account on the World Ranking of Countries in Elite Sport, an innovative research-based ranking methodology, which measures the performance of all the National Olympic Committees in all recognized international competitions on a yearly basis. By ranking all countries, the World Ranking of Countries in Elite Sport will allow for more holistic and accurate comparative studies measuring the success of national elite sport policies. Keywords Measuring · Countries · Success · Sport

1.1

Introduction

This first chapter constitutes the starting point of this research. It first highlights the limitations of the Olympic Medal Table, which ranks less than 50% of the competing countries, does not consider the universality and popularity of each sport, and does not record countries’ results in major competitions such as the tennis grand slams, Formula 1, and the © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 N. Nassif and M. Raspaud, National Success in Elite Sport, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38997-9_1

1

2

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

football, cricket, and rugby union world cups. It then gives an account on the flows of other existing world sport rankings like the World Sport Index of UK Sport, the “ranking of great nations of sport” of “Havas Sports & Entertainment”, that of the “greatestsportingnation” website, and the “SportAccord Index”. After addressing the shortcomings of these existing indexes, this chapter proposes a new research-based ranking methodology entitled the “World Ranking of Countries in Elite Sport (WRCES)”, which annually measures the performance of all the countriesthat have National Olympic Committees in all sports recognized by the Global Association of International Sports Federations (GAISF), in addition to other sports not yet recognized but enjoying a high degree of popularity. The explanation of the advantages of the WRCES will constitute the backbone of this book. It is indeed the characteristics of this ranking that will allow accurate and holistic comparative studies that will identify the factors leading to countries’ success in elite sport. De Bosscher et al. (2008, p. 27) gave several definitions related to elite sport. An elite athlete is someone “who, as an individual or as part of a team, has participated in an elite sports discipline in a European Championship, World Championship, Olympic Games or other competitions that are comparable to these championships or games in the last twelve months”. An “elite coach” is “a coach who trains elite athletes or talented youths”. And an “elite sports coordinator (Performance Director)” is “the person, who, within the federation (National Governing Body) for a specific branch of sport, is responsible for elite sport”. Sotiriadou and Shilbury (2009) have extended this definition to include the athletes that compete in professional sports without necessarily participating in international competitions. Our definition of elite sport, which served the purpose of elaborating the WRCES, arises from these concepts: Elite sport is all the environment related to international and/or professional sport. However, since the WRCES aims at measuring the performance of countries, only the competitions opposing athletes/teams from different countries will be considered. Clubs competitions are, therefore, excluded in this work, because they have the right to or involve athletes from other countries. Media and politicians have traditionally referred to the Olympic Medal Table in order to measure a country’s performance in international competitions (De Bosscher et al., 2006). Scholars also use it to compare success in elite sport (Adami, 2004a; Andersen & Ronglan,

1

MEASUREMENT OF COUNTRIES’ PERFORMANCES …

3

2015; Bravo & Silva, 2014; De Bosscher et al., 2008; Sam & Jackson, 2015). Although according to the Olympic Charter, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the local organizing committees of the Olympic Games shall not draw up any global ranking per country (IOC, 2015), the global acknowledgment of the medal table arises from the fact that the Olympic Games are the most universal multidisciplinary competition in the world. Evidence to that is the participation of 206 NOCs in the Tokyo 2020 Summer Olympic Games, last Summer Olympics to date (as of 2022). The Olympic Medal Table is a ranking model that computes the gold, silver, and bronze medals obtained by different countries in different sport events, in every edition of the Summer and Winter Olympic Games. A gold has superior value over any number of silver, and a silver has superior value over any number of bronze. In the event where two countries obtain the same number of gold, the country with more silver is better ranked. In the case where two countries obtain the same number of gold and silver, the country with more bronze would be better ranked. According to De Bosscher (2008, p. 48), alternative measures “have been used to re-analyze the Olympic medal table. One of them is to rank the countries by the total number of medals won. This measurement wants to avoid the absolute superiority of a gold medal over any number of silver and of a silver over any number of bronze.” However, for De Bosscher (2008, p. 49), this system “does not into account the relative value of medals”. Another system is to award points for the medals, three for the gold, two for silver, and one for bronze. This pointing system is a compromise between the absolute performance and the total number of medals won. De Bosscher has then proposed to do a system of “market share” (2008, p. 50), which consists of the “points won as a proportion of points available to win”. They believe that the market share is the best combination of the absolute ranking, the total medal count, and the pointing system, and, therefore, an accurate measurement of countries’ performances in the Olympics. The market share can however only be applied in the Olympics, and will therefore miss many global sports considered as priorities by many countries, such as rugby union and cricket. It will also omit major events such as the FIFA world cup and the tennis Grand Slam tournaments (2008, p. 57). This is where De Bosscher suggested to consider the World Sporting Index (WSI) that was devised by UK sport

4

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

(2008, p. 56). The WSI proposes a continuous and updatable measure of success in 60 different sports (by opposition to the 35 Olympic sports). It also computes market share in individual sports, where points are awarded to the top eight places where a gold medal is worth ten points, a silver eight, a bronze six, and an eight place one. In addition, the different events are weighted according to their importance, “for example in athletics the World Indoor Championships might be weighted 1, the World Outdoor Championships 2, and the Olympic Games 3”. The WSI allows more athletes, more events, and thus more countries to be ranked. However, the most used ranking remains the Olympic Medal Table. Despite its popularity, we also believe that the Olympic medal ranking has several limitations which prevent it from being a precise measurement tool for countries’ performances in international sport (Nassif, 2018): The superiority of a gold medal over any number of silver and of a sliver over any number of bronze will create situations where a country having only one exceptional athlete capable of winning a gold medal is placed before another one endowed with several athletes who were placed second and third. This methodology creates the false inference that a country with three gold medals, one silver, and two bronze has better results than another one with two gold, five silver, and eleven bronze. In the 2012 Olympics, for example, Croatia had six athletes that finished in the top three, yet managed to be ranked above Canada that got eighteen athletes on the podium. (as we can see in Table 1.1)

1. The number of medals awarded per event does not take into account neither the level of competition of the sport to which it belongs nor the number of countries and athletes it involves. For example, a sport like sailing that has 10 events and is played in 115 countries offers 10 gold medals, whereas a sport like basketball that has Table 1.1 Example of the false inference of the Olympic Medal Table methodology Rank

Countries

Gold

Silver

Bronze

Total

26 27

Croatia Canada

3 2

1 5

2 11

4 18

1

MEASUREMENT OF COUNTRIES’ PERFORMANCES …

5

only two events and is played in 215 countries offers only two gold medals. Moreover, for the same event, sailing as an individual sport can offer medals to several athletes from the same country, whereas basketball as a team sport can only offer one medal per country. In that sense, following the Olympic medal table methodology, a minor sport could largely outweigh a major sport that is more popular, universal, and thus more competitive. This has created a false inference of superiority for certain countries in elite sport which have invested on sports where rivalry is low, and where they could have a competitive advantage (De Bosscher et al., 2019). 2. Although the largest multidisciplinary competition in the world, the Olympics are not the pinnacle event of several sports. In boxing, professionals were allowed to compete in the 2016 Rio de Janeiro Games after 112 years of amateur competitions (National Broadcasting Company, 2016). The lack of financial rewards in Olympic boxing did not encourage the best professionals, considering that only 1.2% of the total number of boxers who competed in Rio were professionals. In 2020, the percentage rose to 15% (Essentiallysports, 2022). In men football, teams are restricted to under-24 players with a maximum of three overage players allowed (The Guardian, 2022). In tennis, men and women players are not granted points for the Association of Tennis Professionals (ATP) and Women Tennis Association (WTA) rankings (essentiallysports, 2022). In men road cycling, the Olympic Games race awards less points than the “Tour de France”, the “Giro d’Italia”, and the Vuelta (International Cycling Union, 2021). In the 2021 professional golf season, last one to date, 24 competitions awarded more points than the Olympic golf tournament (Official World Golf Ranking, 2021).

3. Only 93 countries won medals if the 2020 and 2022 Olympic medal tables were combined (IOC, 2022). 113 countries having NOCs were, therefore, not ranked. This fact will prevent a proper comparative analysis of countries’ success in elite sport considering that

6

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

almost 55% of the participants are absent. According to Henry et al. (2020), the limited number of countries ranked is one of the main weaknesses of the Olympic medal table. The WSI, suggested by De Bosscher (2008, p. 56), also cannot solve this problem as many countries will be left out by only ranking the top 8 competitors in each competition. 3. Only 40 sports were considered by the combined 2020 and 2022 Olympic medal tables. There are many other non-Olympic sports that are recognized by GAISF. The latter is the international organization sanctioned by the IOC to “serve and represent the common interests of all International Federations and coordinate the efforts of all those that aspire to become IOC recognized and eventually, wish to enter the Olympic Program (Global Association of International Sports Federation, 2020)”. GAISF international sport federations members are therefore (Global Association of International Sports Federation, 2020): • Those that are part of the Winter and Summer Olympic programs; • Those that are not yet part of the Olympic programs but are recognized by the IOC; and • Those that are not yet recognized by the IOC. GAISF has a total of 98 members. These factors make the Olympic Medal Table misleading in the case of a proper comparison of national elite sport policies. Other projects have also been undertaken to create countries’ world sports rankings. One of them was the “ranking of great nations of sport”, created by the media group “Havas Sports & Entertainment” (HSE) which took place between 2005 and 2012 (Radio Monte-Carlo, 2020). It aimed to establish an annual hierarchy of different nations according to their sport results in all global competitions. More than 50 sports were taken into account in these eight editions: all the Olympic sports and some non-Olympic sports. This methodology was similar to that of the Olympic medal table, with an absolute superiority of a gold medal over any number of silver and of a silver over any number of bronze. The competitions taken into consideration were the last Olympic Games to date, last World Championships to date, and for some sports, the last international official rankings and international competitions of reference.

1

MEASUREMENT OF COUNTRIES’ PERFORMANCES …

7

Apart from being annual, this methodology did not bring any major difference to the Olympic Medal Table. Some non-Olympic sports were added, but those were chosen without any defined criteria. Indeed, many other non-Olympic sports were not considered, and this fact was not clarified. Two of the sports chosen were twirling and street hockey, which are not even recognized by GAISF. The absolute superiority of a gold medal over any number of silver and of a silver over any number of bronze granted a gold medal in a non-recognized sport such as twirling the same value as winning the Football World Cup. In addition, the HSE granted the title of sports to some events that are not recognized as sports according to the IOC’s glossary, as shown in Table 1.2. For example, “HSE” mistakenly referred to the following disciplines as sports. Jet Ski, which is the discipline of aquabike; branch of the sport of powerboating which has other disciplines including circuit, offshore, and pleasure navigation (International Powerboating Union, 2020). These three disciplines and the sport of powerboating are not considered by the HSE’s ranking. It also referred to K1, branch of the sport of kickboxing, which also includes other disciplines comprising light contact, low-kick, musical forms, full contact, and point fighting (World Association of Kickboxing Union, 2020), as a sport. All these disciplines and the sport of kickboxing are not considered by the HSE’s ranking. Some rankings have been created by passionate sport fans. The oldest is the one proposed by the “greatestsportingnation” website started in 2008 and still running today (2022). This ranking takes into account the nations’ performance alongside the year under championship form. A champion nation is declared at the end of each year. The methodology is the following (Greatestsportingnation, 2022): Table 1.2 Glossary (IOC, 2020) Term

Definition

Examples

Sport

A group of disciplines or events that belong to the same international federation A branch in a sport comprising one or more events A competition in a sport or discipline that gives rise to a ranking

Aquatics

Discipline Event

Swimming is a discipline in the sport of aquatics Men 50 M freestyle is an event of the discipline of swimming that belongs to the sport of aquatics

8

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

1. The countries do mark the “qualifying points” by ending in the top 8 of the “qualifying events”. Such “qualifying points” may be marked by national teams or individuals representing the countries. At the end of the season, the country that has obtained the most points is declared world champion. 2. Such “qualifying points” are marked as follows: 10 points for the 1st place, 8 points for the 2nd place, 6 points for the 3rd place, 5 points for the 4th place, 4 points for the 5th place, 3 points for the 6th place, 2 points for the 7th place, and 1 point for the 8th place. 3. The qualifying events are all the Olympic sports and some other non-Olympic sports. 4. The points won in team sports are multiplied by the number of players per team for a maximum of 10. Sports regrouping minimum 5 players per team on the playground are considered team sports. 5. The qualifying points are multiplied by the number of countries participating in such sport. The inaccuracies of the “Greatestsportingnation” methodology reside in the following points: 1. Only the top 8 athletes in each event will receive points. Every country or athlete ranked below the 8th position will not get any point. As a result, many of the countries that failed to make it to a top 8 position will not be ranked. This is why in the 14 editions proposed by the website (2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021), the highest number of countries that were ranked have never exceeded 137 (66% of the countries). 2. No clear distinction between the events, disciplines, or sports is available. The events of athletics (100 m, 10,000 m, and 1500 m) are all considered as separate sports, while swimming that includes a multitude of events is considered as one sport. 3. Similar to the HSE ranking, the non-Olympic sports that are chosen without any defined criteria. 4. The competitions considered are also unclearly chosen. For example, in 2018, 11 golf competitions were chosen, many of them being local, hence not including all the countries. On the other hand, for the same year, only the world championship was chosen for judo.

1

MEASUREMENT OF COUNTRIES’ PERFORMANCES …

9

5. The universality and popularity of each sport are not considered. Gracenote, an entertainment data and technology company, has created the “SportAccord Index” aiming at ranking all the sports recognized by GAISF (Infostrada sports, 2020). Gracenote also intended to weigh the different sports based on the competitiveness and number of countries participating in it. Although it was looking to provide an accurate measurement of countries’ performances in elite sport, the “SportAccord Index” presented the following inaccuracies: 1. Only 75 of the sports recognized by GAISF are considered. The following sports are missing: American football, pelota vasca, casting, cheer, climbing and mountaineering, ice stock sport, minigolf, polo, powerboating, kendo, kickboxing, and savate. 2. Not all the countries ranked have NOCs. The following countries are ranked: England, Scotland, Wales, North Ireland, French Polynesia, Hawaii, West Indies, Macau, New Caledonia, Curacao, Anguilla, Faroe Islands, Channel Islands, Gibraltar, Niue, Guadeloupe, Montserrat, Northern Mariana Islands, and Martinique. These countries do not have access to the Olympic Games. They will, therefore, not be ranked in many sports. 3. There is no clear explanation on how the weighing of the different sports according to their competitiveness was calculated. 4. Concerning the competitions chosen, the reason these competitions were chosen remains unclear. In basketball, for example, the world cup and the Olympic Games are considered. Although these are the two most important competitions in basketball, the International Basketball Federation (FIBA) has an official ranking that weighs these competitions. The same applies for sports like badminton, cricket, equestrian, football, and tennis which all have rankings made by their respective international federations. The “SportAccord Index” existed for one edition, the year 2018. The experience was not renewed. An accurate evaluation of countries’ performances was the starting point of our research. The aim of this new ranking methodology is to annually measure the performance of the 206 countries that have NOCs in all the sports recognized by the GAISF in addition to other sports

10

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

not yet recognized but enjoying wide popularity (like mixed martial arts and esports). The International Society for Sports Sciences in the Arab World (I3SAW) adopted this methodology, and for the first three editions (2014, 2015, and 2016), this ranking was called the I3SAW Ranking for Countries in Elite Sport. Since 2017, this ranking was known as the World Ranking of Countries in Elite Sport (WRCES); a title which was trademarked and copyrighted in 173 countries. The WRCES methodology is written in the certificate number 2553 signed on August 17, 2017 by the Lebanese Ministry of Economy and Commerce (Lebanese Ministry of Education and Commerce, 2017) and published in the sport economy and law journal “Rivista Di Diritto Ed Economia Dello Sport” (Nassif, 2018). The main features of this model are first a computational model that attributes to each country its share of points in at least one sport, and consequently its world ranking on the basis of the total number of points garnered by this country in all sports; and second the introduction of universality and popularity coefficients for each sport. The universality and popularity of each sport can grow and new sports can be added. All the yearly methodology updates are found in the WRCES website (WRCES, 2022). Popularity indicates the international media ratings for each sport. It shows to which extent a sport is covered; consequently, how much this sport attracts private and public funding and raises competition level by engaging the most talented athletes. Universality takes into account the number of all countries participating in a given sport. The more countries participate, the more difficult it is for them to win in an event. Such parameters are obviously not being considered in the Olympic medal table. By taking into account the universality and popularity of each sport, our goal was to give a differential weight for minor sports like curling or luge, and major sports like football and basketball. Major sports are subject to a higher competition, plus succeeding in them has a higher impact on the societies of each country. Indeed, as Andersen and Ronglan showed, success in international sports represents no societal value in itself, it is the social importance of this success (influence on mass sport, national identity…) that makes it valuable for a country (Andersen & Ronglan, 2012, p. 13). The WRCES’ model attributes distinct coefficients for the universality and popularity of each sport and computes a scaled score for each nation.

1

MEASUREMENT OF COUNTRIES’ PERFORMANCES …

11

By giving an accurate ranking of the 206 NOCs, our intention was to open the door for a holistic and precise comparative analysis of countries’ performances in elite sport (in some sports where countries like England, North Ireland, Wales, or Scotland participate, the best ranking obtained by one of these countries will count for GB). The same applies for Tahiti and New Caledonia, which points will go to France in case they are ranked ahead of France in a specific sport. Same case for Macau, which points will go to China in case it is ranked ahead of China in a specific sport. In cricket, for example, the points won by West Indies will be divided by 12 and will be allocated to Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, British Virgin Islands, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Jamaica, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Trinidad and Tobago, and Virgin Islands. The starting point of the WRCES is a weighted pointing system that replaces the three-medal Olympic system in any event, discipline, or sport (Nassif, 2018). Since the number of NOCs that participated in the 2020 Olympics (last Summer Olympics to date) is 206, any team or athlete participating in an event, whether a team sport (basketball, football, handball…) or individual sport (athletics, swimming, wrestling…) is granted a basic score of 206, the second is granted 205, the third, 204, and so on…To reward the top eight participants in every event, we introduced a weighting coefficient inspired from the formula 1 scores between 2003 and 2009 (Formula 1, 2016). These incentives were given to the top eight as they represent several achievements in sport: • Quarterfinalists of any direct elimination competition around the world. • Finalists of most of the swimming and athletics events, which are among the most popular in the Olympics. • Although the WRCES’s main characteristic was to award points to all participating athletes, it does not intend to discredit the Olympic medals which represent some of the most coveted titles in sport. Thus, as summarized in Table 1.3, the winner of the event will have their basic points multiplied by ten, the second by eight, the third by six, the fourth by five, the fifth by four, the sixth by three, the second by two, and the eighth by one. A gold medalist will therefore win 2060 points, 420 more than the silver medalist, 836 more than the bronze medalists, 1045 more than the fourth, 1252 more than

12

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

the fifth, 1457 more than the sixth, 1660 more than the seventh, and 1861 more than the eighth. All those ranked eighth and above will obtain points that decrease from 199 to 1. If, for example, there are only 200 countries participating, the last will obtain seven points. If there are 190, the last will obtain 17 points. The points earned in each event were added to determine the ranking of countries in each event. With these criteria, the objective was to avoid situations of having countries with 1 gold medal, 0 silver, and 0 bronze, ranked above some that won 0 gold medal, 5 silver medals, and 7 bronze medals. This is a major difference with the Olympic ranking that only uses medals for the top three competitors in each event. As you will see in Table 1.4, in case of an individual sport with more than one competitor from each country, we obtain a total number of points per event for each country by summing up the points received by its athletes in that event. Table 1.3 Points classification within an event, discipline, or sport (Nassif, 2018) Rank in an event, discipline, or sport

Basic number points Weight (Formula 1 granted on basis of the 2003–2009 scale) number of NOCs

Weighted basic number of points:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 …… …… …… …… …… 206

206 205 204 203 202 201 200 199 198 197 196 …… …… …… …… …… 1

2060 1640 1224 1015 808 603 400 199 198 197 196 …… …… …… …… …… 1

10 8 6 5 4 3 2 1 1 1 1 …… …… …… …… …… 1

1

MEASUREMENT OF COUNTRIES’ PERFORMANCES …

13

Table 1.4 Example of ranking and scaled points granting for a country in an event A (Nassif, 2018) Ranking of athletes in event A

Points

Corresponding ranking of countries in event A

Points

1 USA

2060

2060

2 Brazil 3 Brazil

1640 1224

4 5 6 7 8

1010 808 603 400 199

1. Brazil 2864 (1640 + 1224) 2. USA 2060 3. France 1209 (1010 + 199) 4. Italy 1003 (603 + 400) 5. Spain 808

France Spain Italy Italy France

1640 1224 1010 808

If a sport has several disciplines (like aquatics which includes the disciplines of swimming, water polo, synchronized swimming, and diving), the points won in every event are computed by discipline (see Table 1.5) and the points won in every discipline are computed by sport (see Table 1.6) following the same pointing system: 2060 for the first, 1640 for the second, 1224 for the third, 1010 for the fourth, 808 for the fifth, 603 for the sixth, 400 for the seventh, and 199 for the eighth. Those ranked below will have points that decrease from 198 to 1. Accordingly, if we take the sport of aquatics as an example, the points won by a country in every event (such as men 50 m freestyle, 100 m women backstroke, 200 m men Medley) are computed by discipline (swimming, water polo, synchronized swimming, and diving). The points by countries in each discipline are then computed to produce the final ranking of the sport of aquatics (see Fig. 1.1). If a sport does not have any discipline (such athletics), the points won in every event will be computed by sport (see Table 1.7). This method was applied to avoid a sport that has a multitude of events (athletics, aquatics, boxing) awarding more points than a team sport with only two events (such as basketball: men/women). In case there are more than 206 athletes in an individual sport event, countries that have no athlete ranked in the top 206 will still have points if the top 206 athletes are from less than 206 countries. These countries will be ranked below the last ranked country that has one of its athletes in the top 206. The more they have athletes ranked after 206, the better

14

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

Table 1.5 Sample of disciplines in which the “summing-up rule” of events is being applied Disciplines examples

Points

Swimming

Sum of the points gained in the different men’s and women’s swimming events (100 m freestyle men, 100 m freestyle women, 200 m butterfly men, 400 m freestyle relay…) country rankings Sum of the points gained in the men’s and women’s water polo events country rankings Sum of the points gained in the different men’s and women’s diving events (individual 3 m springboard men, individual 10 M platform women, synchronized 10 m platform, 400 m freestyle relay…) country rankings

Water Polo Diving

Table 1.6 Sample of sports in which the “summing-up rule” of disciplines is being applied Sports examples

Points

Aquatics

Sum of the points gained in the different aquatics disciplines: Diving, swimming, synchronized swimming, and water polo country rankings Sum of the points gained in the different cycling disciplines: Bicycle Motocross (BMX), mountain biking, road, track cycling (etc.…) country rankings Sum of the points gained in the different equestrian disciplines: Dressage, eventing, jumping (etc.…) country rankings

Cycling

Equestrian

ranking they will have. This was done to make sure that every country participating in a sport will get points. The points won in the ranking of each sport are then multiplied by coefficients of university and popularity. These coefficients are first used to weigh some of the events witnessing a large difference between men and women, whether superiority is accorded to men (football, basketball, boxing, baseball, cricket, golf, ice hockey, American football, handball, rugby union, rugby sevens, road cycling, futsal, rugby league, Australian football, and sumo) or women (netball and softball). The points gained in the different men’s and women’s events will be multiplied by these coefficients before calculating their sum that leads to the rankings of disciplines.

1

MEASUREMENT OF COUNTRIES’ PERFORMANCES …

15

Fig. 1.1 Points computation by sport, discipline, and event

Table 1.7 Sample of sports in which the “summing-up rule” of events in sports without different disciplines is being applied Sports examples

Points

Athletics

Sum of the points gained in the different men’s and women’s athletics events (pole vault, long jump, high jump, triple jump, 100 M, marathon…) country rankings Sum of the points gained in the men’s and women’s weight categories events country rankings Sum of the points gained in the different men’s and women’s rowing events (Single sculls men, pair women, eight men..) country rankings

Boxing Rowing

In sports where a difference between men and women is not spotted, the events will not be weighted. Points gained in the different disciplines will be multiplied by their popularity and universality coefficients before calculating their sum, which results in sports rankings. The points won in the different sports will be multiplied by their popularity and universality coefficients. 1.1.1

Universality Coefficients

The universality coefficient is calculated based on the sport’s number of national federations, its presence in the programs of the Olympics, the International School sport federation (ISF), International University

16

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

Sports Federation (FISU), International Military Sports Council (CISM), International Police Sport Union (USIP), International Masters Games Association (IMGA), World Transplant Games Federation (WTGF), Special Olympics (SO), the International Committee of Sports for the Deaf (CISS), the International Workers and Amateurs in Sports Confederation (CSIT), and the Committee of the International Children’s Games (CICG); all international multisport organizations recognized by the IOC in addition to having an official program. This is explained in Table 1.8. 1.1.2

Remarks

1. The coefficients were rescaled by 100 to have a total universality coefficient between 0 and 100. If the points won by the countries were multiplied by a coefficient number that was not rescaled by 100, the total number of points won by each country would be too high and, therefore, not easily readable and used by the researchers, media, or sport organizations. 2. When a Sport is Part of the Olympics Program, the Total Number of Federations’ Rating Will Be Equal to Its Number of Federations. 3. If a sport recognized by the ISF has less than 116 affiliated countries, its points would be equal to the number of these countries divided by 100. 4. If a sport that is part of the FISU Program has less than 173 affiliated countries, its points would be the number of these countries divided by 100. 5. If a sport recognized by the CISM has less than 138 affiliated countries, its points would be the number of these countries divided by 100. 6. If a sport recognized by the IMGA has less than 100 affiliated countries, its points would be the number of these countries divided by 100. 7. If a sport recognized by the WTGF has less than 59 countries, its points would be the number of these countries divided by 100. 8. If a sport recognized by the SO has less than 172 affiliated countries, its points would be the number of these countries divided by 100. 9. If a sport recognized by the Deaflympics has less than 113 affiliated countries, its points would be the number of these countries divided by 100.

1

MEASUREMENT OF COUNTRIES’ PERFORMANCES …

17

Table 1.8 Example of the attribution of universality coefficients in the 2019 WRCES Athletics Nf% = Number of federations/100 Olympics program coeff. = (Number of federations/100) ISF program coeff. = min (116; number of national sport school federations)/100 (116 being the max number of national school sports federations) FISU program coeff. = min (173; number of national university sports federations)/100. (173 being the max number of national university sports federations) CISM program coeff. = min (138; number of national military sports federations)/100. (138 being the max number of national military sports federations) IMGA program coeff. = min (100; number of national master sports federations)/100 (100 being the max number of national master sports federations) WTGF program coeff. = min (59; number of national transplant games sports federations)/100 (59 being the max number of national transplant games sports federations) SO program coeff. = min (172; number of national Special Olympics federations)/100 (172 being the max number of National Special Olympics sports federations) CISS program coeff. = min (113; number of national Deaflympics sports federations)/100 (113 being the max number of National Deaflympics sports federations) CICG coeff. = min (32; number of national Children games sports federations)/100 (32 being the max number of National Children games sports federations) CSIT coeff. = min (30; number of national workers and amateurs sports federations)/100 (30 being the max number national workers and amateurs sports federations) USIP coeff. = min (71; number of national police sports federations) / (71 being the max number of national police sports federations) Total Universality

2.06 2.06 1.16

1.73

1.38

1

0.59

1.72

1.13

0.32

0.3

0.71 14.17

10. If a sport recognized by the CICG has less than 32 affiliated countries, its points would be the number of these countries divided by 100. 11. If a sport recognized by the CSIT has less than 31 affiliated countries, its points would be the number of these countries divided by 100.

18

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

Table 1.9 Universality coefficients of the different disciplines within the sport of cycling

Universality coefficient Cycling Road Cycling Track Cycling Mountain Biking Cyclo-cross BMX Trials Indoor

14.35 9.9 5.01 6.71 0.78 1.30 0.31 0.17

12. If a sport recognized by the USIP has less than 71 affiliated countries, its points would be the number of these countries divided by 100. If within a sport (like cycling for example), a difference in terms of universality between the different disciplines is noticed (road cycling, track cycling, mountain biking…), there will be a difference in the universality coefficient between them. Since they are run by the same international federation (International Cycling Union), however, the universality coefficient of cycling will be equal to the cycling discipline that has the highest universality coefficient (see Table 1.9). 1.1.3

Popularity Coefficient

For the popularity coefficient, we will first measure the frequent presence of the different sports in each country’s major sport website in a one year span (Alexa, 2020). Since there are many differences in popularity between events within a discipline (between men football and women football for example) or between disciplines within a sport (between football and futsal for examples), we will look to the most popular sport event. In every country, the most popular sport event will receive a score of 100. If, for example, a country has eight popular sports events with a weekly appearance on the top sport website, the most popular among these events would receive a score of 100 and the other seven sports events that are ranked below would receive points according to the rule of three, with the less popular of these sports getting 1 point.

1

MEASUREMENT OF COUNTRIES’ PERFORMANCES …

19

As an example, if men’s football is the most popular sport event in France, it will receive 100 points. The seven others will get: (Points for the 2nd most popular sport event * 100) / 8 = (7*100)/ 8 = 87.5 (Points for the 3rd most popular sport event * 100) / 8 = (6*100)/ 8 = 75. (Points for the 4th most popular sport event * 100) / 8 = (5*100)/ 8 = 62.5 (Points for the 5th most popular sport event * 100) / 8 = (4*100)/ 8 = 50. (Points for the 6th most popular sport event * 100) / 8 = (3*100)/ 8 = 37.5 (Points for the 7th most popular sport event * 100) / 8 = (2*100)/ 8 = 25. (Points for the 8th most popular sport event * 100) / 8 = (1*100)/ 8 = 12.5 The sports that have a lower popularity, meaning they are covered by the website but not on a weekly basis, would have less than 12.5. This was conducted to create a realistic gap between mainstream and confidential sports. The most popular of these sports would be given 12 points and the others would have points depending on their numbers and the rule of 3. Accordingly, if the number of these sports is 57, the lowest will have: (Less popular sport event*12)/57 = (1*12)/57 = 0.21. These points will then be multiplied by a coefficient based on the GDP of each country. The GDP was chosen because it represents the economic size of the country, thus the amount of money available and not necessarily the wealth of the individuals living there. Indeed, China has the second highest GDP in the world, but the 57th GDP per capita (World Bank, 2020). China’s high GDP makes it a target for many international sport federations and professional sport organizations aiming to increase the revenues of their sports (Hong, 1997). The top four major professional North American sport leagues, the National Basketball Association (NBA), National Hockey League (NHL), National Football League (NFL), and Major League Baseball (MLB) are all aiming to break

20

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

through the Chinese sport market by the organization of games, commercialization, marketing, and merchandising of their products. Multiplying the points by a country’s GDP coefficient was, therefore, conducted because we consider that a sport popular in countries with a large GDP attracts more funding. Consequently, a “wealthy sport” will attract more talented athletes and thus have a higher level of competition. We proceeded as follows. Every trillion of dollars gives one point for the GDP coefficient. Given that, for example, France’s GDP is 2.58 trillion, the French GDP coefficient will be 2.58. Therefore, the most popular sport event in France will have 258 points. The popularity points won by a sport event in each country are then added to have their total number of points in the world (see Table 1.10). Since 112 sports are included in the 2019 WRCES, the most popular sport event in the world (men football) will have a popularity coefficient of 112. This was done because we consider that the most popular sport will be the first among the 112 choices that present themselves to youth interested in building a career in professional sport. The popularity coefficient of the different sports (that of their most popular sport event) will then be calculated in three steps (we took the example of basketball and football): 1. (Men basketball * 112) / Men football total popularity points = (5537.56*112)/ 7042.887 = 88 All the sports will receive a first coefficient (related to the media popularity of the sport) based on this rule of three. 2. We will then observe in how many countries this sport event is popular. This was done to avoid a very popular sport in a limited number of wealthy countries (i.e. American football) outweighing Table 1.10 Total number of popularity points for men football in the 2018 WRCES

Countries

Popularity points for men football

France Germany Greece Hungary … World

258 367 20 13.9 … 7042.887

1

MEASUREMENT OF COUNTRIES’ PERFORMANCES …

21

a sport that generates less money but is popular in a much higher number of countries (e.g. volleyball). Here as well, the sport (football) with events present in the largest number of countries will receive a coefficient of 112. The others will get a coefficient based on the rule of three. For example: (number of countries where men basketball is popular * 112) / number of countries where men football is popular) = (151*112)/194 = 87.18 All the sports will receive a second coefficient (related to the number of countries where this sport is popular) based on this rule of three. 3. The final popularity coefficient of each sport will be an average of the first and second coefficient. The rule of three was implemented to create a more realistic gap between the popularity of each sport. Indeed, for the year 2019, men football received 7042.887 in terms of total popularity points compared to 5537.56 for men basketball. And men football is popular in 194 countries compared to 151 for men basketball. Giving 112 for football and 111 for basketball will not reflect the real gap in terms of popularity between these two disciplines.

In order to align with the calculation of the universality coefficient and avoid a popularity coefficient disproportionally higher than the universality coefficient, the popularity coefficient of a sport will be equal to the coefficient of its more popular discipline (see Table 1.11). Indeed, if we add the popularity coefficients of the different disciplines to have a total popularity coefficient of a sport, the popularity coefficient will be much higher than its universality coefficient. Since there is no indication that the universality and popularity of an event, discipline, or sport are correlated, the total coefficients of each event, discipline, or sport in the WRCES methodology will be the sum of its universality and popularity coefficients. Table 1.12 will demonstrate the example of handball. This methodology has been used to calculate the total coefficient of 112 sports in 2019. Accordingly, the points won in every event after the coefficient multiplications will be computed by discipline, and the points won in every discipline after the coefficient multiplications will

22

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

Table 1.11 Popularity coefficients of the sport of football and its disciplines

Popularity coefficient Football (the sport) Football (the discipline) Futsal Beach soccer

112 112 (112 Men, 9.37 Women) 12.51 2.39

Table 1.12 Total coefficient for the sport of handball

Handball (the sport)

Popularity coefficient

Universality coefficient

Total coefficient = (Popularity coefficient + Universality coefficient)

25.34

10.17

35.51

be computed by sport. For example, in the sport of aquatics in 2019, the United States of America (USA) got the first position in swimming, fourth in diving, ninth in artistic swimming, fourth in open water swimming, second in water polo, and first in high diving. Table 1.13 will show the number of points the USA won in the different disciplines of Aquatics. To calculate the points won by the USA in aquatics, we will first calculate the sum of the points it won in each of the aquatics disciplines, as shown in Table 1.14. Since the USA got the highest number of points in aquatics, it will be ranked number one in this sport. The total points the USA will receive from aquatics will therefore be: Points won from being ranked number one * Aquatics total coefficient. = 2060 * 37.35. = 76,941 The points won by each country in each of the sports after the coefficients multiplications were added to obtain their total number of points (see Table 1.15 with the top 3 countries). The final ranking was done according to the “summed” total amount of each country.

1

MEASUREMENT OF COUNTRIES’ PERFORMANCES …

23

Table 1.13 Points won by the USA in the different disciplines of Aquatics in the 2019 WRCES Disciplines

USA rank in each discipline

Points won by the USA considering its rank

Coefficient of each discipline

Points won by the USA after the coefficient multiplication = Points won by the USA considering its rank * Coefficient of each discipline

Swimming Diving Artistic swimming Water polo Open water swimming High diving

1st 4th 9th

2060 1015 198

36.85 7.26 0.8

2060*36.85 = 75,911 1015*7.26 = 7368.9 198*0.8 = 158.4

2nd 4th

1684 1015

8.2 1.02

1684*8.2 = 13,448 1015*1.02 = 1035.3

1st

2060

0.16

2060*0.16 = 329.6

Table 1.14 Points won by the USA in aquatics after summing up the points it won in the different aquatics disciplines in the 2019 WRCES Points won by USA Swimming Diving Artistic swimming Water Polo Open water swimming High diving Total aquatics

75,911 7368.9 158.4 13,448 1035.3 329.6 75,911 + 7368.9 + 158.4 + 13,448 + 1035.3 + 329.6 = 98,251.2

Table 1.15 Samples of total number of points of the top three countries in the 2019 Final WRCES

Sum of the points won in the 112 sports considered by the 2019 WRCES

1st - USA

2nd - France

3rd - GB

1,627,293

979,438

966,568

24

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

1.2 What Competitions Were Chosen in Each Sport? For the competitions chosen, the WRCES uses the official senior ranking (youth, master, or para disciplines were not considered) made by the international federation of each sport, in case such ranking exists. That is because we consider that the international federations are in the best position to know their sports’ major competitions and how to weigh them. This was the case of sports such as archery, badminton, basketball, fencing, field hockey, football, judo, and table tennis. Each international federation related to these sports adopts a different methodology for its ranking. In archery (World Archery, 2021) for example, the individual ranking is based on the points obtained by different archers in the competitions of different events organized by World Archery (WA). A nation ranking does not exist. We, therefore, used these individual rankings and applied the WRCES pointing system to carry out the archery ranking. In badminton, the nations’ ranking is based on points won by a country’s athletes in the different badminton events’ rankings of the Badminton World Federation (BWF): men’s singles, women’s singles, men’s doubles, women’s doubles, and mixed doubles (BWF, 2021). We used the BWF nations’ ranking to carry out the Badminton ranking. In men and women basketball, the FIBA proceeds in two stages: It first calculates the rating points for each game to each team, then calculates the ranking according to the weighted average rating points of each team over all games in the previous 8-year period (FIBA, 2021). We used the FIBA men and women ranking to complete the basketball ranking. In fencing (International Fencing Federation, 2021), the ranking is based on the points obtained by the different fencers in the competitions of different events organized by the International Fencing Federation (FIE). A nation ranking does not exist. We, therefore, used these individual rankings and applied the WRCES pointing system to achieve the fencing ranking. In men and women field hockey, the ranking established by the International Hockey Federation (FIH) is based on the Elo rating system, where two nations playing against each other exchange a number of ranking points. The number of points exchanged depends on the match result (win, loss, shootout win/loss or draw), the importance of the match (part of a major tournament or a test series for example), and the relative

1

MEASUREMENT OF COUNTRIES’ PERFORMANCES …

25

difference in ranking points between the teams before the match (FIH, 2021). We used the FIH rankings to complete the field hockey ranking. The International Football Federation (FIFA) also uses an Elo rating system (FIFA, 2021) similar to the FIH. We used the FIFA rankings to complete the football ranking. In Judo, the nations’ ranking (International Judo Federation, 2021) is based on the points won by a country’s athletes in the different weight divisions rankings of the International Judo Federation (IJF). We used the IJF nations’ rankings to complete the judo ranking. In table tennis, the men and women teams’ rankings are based on the points won by a country’s athletes in the different table tennis events’ rankings of the International Table Tennis Federation (ITTF): men’s singles, women’s singles, men’s doubles, women’s doubles, and mixed doubles (ITTF, 2021). We used the ITTF teams’ rankings to carry out the table tennis ranking. The list of sports we included here is not exhaustive and constitutes a sample of the sports where the WRCES uses the official rankings of international federations. Some sports do not have an official ranking (athletics) or have a ranking that uses the best performances of each athlete without considering the results of the competitions (weightlifting, aquatics, or gymnastics). In these sports, we will use the results of the last major competitions. In the case of Olympic sports, we use the last Olympics and world championships to date. The results of the Olympics will last for four years and those of the world championships for less (depending on their frequency). This is because we found that the Olympics are the major competitions for these sports in terms of media popularity. In the 2016 edition of the WRCES, for example, the athletics ranking included the 2015 athletics world championship and the 2016 Olympics’ athletics championship. In the 2017 edition, the athletics ranking considered the 2016 Olympics and the 2017 world championship. In 2018, it also considered the 2016 Olympics and the 2017 world championship. In 2019 (last edition to date), it was the 2016 Olympics and 2019 world championship. By doing this, our intention was to prioritize countries’ performance in the Olympics; the flagship competition of these sports. In some sports, the ranking considered was not prepared by the international federation of this sport. In men golf, for example, the Official World Golf Ranking (OWGR) was created by The Royal and Ancient Golf Club of Saint Andrews (R&A) and Sony (OWGR, 2021). It is

26

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

considered by the International Golf Federation (IGF) to be the official world ranking for professional men golfers (IGF, 2021), which are the elite of the men event. For women’s professional golf, the official ranking (rolexrankings, 2021), sponsored by Rolex (a Swiss luxury watch manufacturer based in Switzerland), is sanctioned by the five major women’s professional gold Tours: Ladies Professional Golf Association (LPGA), Ladies European Tour (LET), Ladies Professional Golfers Association of Japan (JLPGA), Korea Ladies Professional Golf Association (KLPGA), and the Australian Ladies Professional Golf (ALPG). It is considered by the IGF for being the official world ranking for professional women golfers. Both the men and women golf official rankings evaluate players’ performances over a rolling two-year period weighted in favor of the current year with further importance placed on the most recent 13 weeks (IGF, 2021). Since both the men and women golf rankings are individual, we used these rankings and applied the WRCES pointing system to complete the final golf ranking. Tennis has a similar case. We will not take into consideration the rankings of the International Tennis Federation (ITF), the international federation of this sport (ITF, 2021), because they do not include the top tennis players. For this reason, we will use the rankings of the ATP and the WTA, both respectively the rankings of the men (ATP, 2021) and women (WTA, 2021) professional tennis. The ATP and WTA are official partners but are not under the ITF’s authority. The WRCES considers alternative measurements for sports that have special cases, which is the case for boxing. As mentioned above, professional boxing is the pinnacle of the sport of boxing. Due to the multitude of organizations running professional boxing, the rankings of the different categories are attributed to the specialized boxing magazine The Ring (2021), the Entertainment and Sports Programming Network (ESPN) sport channel (ESPN, 2021), and the “Boxrec” website (Boxrec, 2021). For the WRCES, we have chosen to use the results of the “Boxrec” website because it includes all the professional boxers unlike The Ring and ESPN which rank the top ten of each weight and gender category. By using “Boxrec”, the WRCES boxing ranking was able to include all the countries involved in boxing. Therefore, whether it uses official rankings from international sport federations, official rankings from recognized professional sport organizations, results of major official world competitions, or alternative legitimate rankings, the objective of the WRCES is to always measure the performance of countries in the elite competitions of each sport.

1

MEASUREMENT OF COUNTRIES’ PERFORMANCES …

27

1.3 What Changes Did the WRCES Methodology Bring? In the 2021 WRCES edition (last edition to date), 206 countries were ranked instead of the 94 that were only ranked by the combined 2020– 2022 Olympic Medal Tables. The WRCES also provides an annual evaluation of countries’ performances in more than 100 sports (103 in 2017, 109 in 2018, 112 in 2019, and 115 in 20211 ) instead of one conducted once every 4 years in only 40 sports by the combined Winter and Summer Olympic Medal Table. It also accounts countries’ performances in all the major international competitions like the FIFA World Cup, Tennis Grand slams, and Rugby Union World Cup where success is not recorded by the Olympic Medal Table. Finally, it measures countries’ performances in sport more accurately. According to Mostapha Khalil (Khalil, 2016), volunteer in the Egyptian NOC: “Ethiopia is not better than us in sports. We beat them in everything except long distance running ”. The WRCES gave reason to Khalil’s statement, as you will find in Tables 1.16 and 1.17. Indeed, it rewards countries that succeed in highly popular and universal sports that do not offer many medals (Argentina in basketball and football), and appropriately scales those that win several medals in minor sports with a multitude of events (Norway in winter sports and Hungary in canoe-kayak), as you will find in Tables 1.18 and 1.19. By proposing a detailed ranking methodology, we aimed to create an accurate measurement of every country’s performance in elite sport, working toward a future where the WRCES is an acknowledged and used scale by media, national governing bodies, and scholars. In September 2018, it was presented to the Association of Sport Performance Centers’ (ASPC) first African Forum that took place in Durban,

1 Due to the outbreak of the COVID-19 virus (World Health Organization, 2020) that led to the cancellation of the 2020 Olympics (Washington Post, 2020) and many of the other international competitions ( European Union of Football Association, 2020; Wimbledon, 2020), the 2020 WRCES was cancelled. The results of the competitions that took place in 2020 will be counted for 2021. A new modification happened also in 2021: The Paralympic sports will be regrouped and counted as one sport, called Para-sport. The popularity coefficient of the latter will be calculated like for the other sports and its universality coefficient will be the sum of the universality coefficients of all the Paralympic sports.

28

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

Table 1.16 Comparison between Egypt and Ethiopia’s results in the 2016 WRCES and the 2014–2016 combined Olympic Medal Tables Countries

2014–2016 combined Olympic Medal Tables

2016 WRCES

Ethiopia Egypt

48th 77th

144th 39th

Table 1.17 Comparison between Egypt and Ethiopia’s results in the 2018 WRCES and the 2016–2018 combined Olympic Medal Tables Countries

2016–2018 combined Olympic Medal Tables

2018 WRCES

Ethiopia Egypt

47th 75th

168th 57th

Table 1.18 Comparison between Argentina, Norway, and Hungary’s results in the 2016 WRCES and the 2014–2016 combined Olympic Medal Tables Countries

2014–2016 combined Olympic Medal Tables

2016 WRCES

Argentina Norway Hungary

36th 11th 15th

11th 22nd 28th

Table 1.19 Comparison between Argentina, Norway, and Hungary’s results in the 2018 WRCES and the 2016–2018 combined Olympic Medal Tables Countries

2016–2018 combined Olympic Medal Tables

2018 WRCES

Argentina Norway Hungary

35th 10th 14th

18th 22nd 31st

South Africa. The ASPC, which includes members such as the Loughborough University, United Kingdom (UK) Sport, INSEP (French Center for Sport Excellence), FC Barcelona, and the United States Olympic Committee (USOC), is an international body which mission is to “provide opportunities that enhance training for high performance sport

1

MEASUREMENT OF COUNTRIES’ PERFORMANCES …

29

(elite sport) worldwide” (ASPC, 2022). Its vision is “to set the standard in the global high performance training site community”. The ASPC is currently (2022) investigating whether it will formally sanction this ranking (Escoda, 2022). The WRCES will be annual and might introduce more sports in the upcoming years, but its methodology will always be based on a pointing system that includes all countries participating in the international sport movement and coefficients of popularity and universality. Since it ranks all the countries, the WRCES will allow for comparatives studies between the countries’ elite sport policies that are more developed, accurate, and holistic than the Olympic Medal Table. The WRCES will constitute the measurement on which we will base our analysis. However, before undertaking this work, chapter II will showcase the literature review related to the factors leading to countries’ success in elite sport.

References Adami, S. (2004a). Les Jeux méditerranéens. Confluences Méditerranée, 3, 21–30. Adami, S. (2004b). Les femmes aux Jeux méditerranéens. Confluences Méditerrannée, 50, 53–68. Andersen, S. S., & Ronglan, L. T. (2015). Historical paths and policy change: Institutional entrepreneurship in Nordic elite sport systems. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 7 (2), 197–216. Andersen, S. S., & Ronglan, L. T. (Eds.). (2012). Nordic elite sport: Same ambitions, different tracks. Copenhagen Business School Press DK. Bravo, G., & Silva, J. (2014). Sport policy in Chile. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 6(1), 129–142. De Bosscher, V. (2008). The global sporting arms race: An international comparative study on sports policy factors leading to international sporting success. Meyer & Meyer Verlag. De Bosscher, V., De Knop, P., Van Bottenburg, M., & Shibli, S. (2006). A conceptual framework for analysing sports policy factors leading to international sporting success. European Sport Management Quarterly, 6(2), 185–215. De Bosscher, V., Heyndels, B., De Knop, P., van Bottenburg, M., & Shibli, S. (2008). The paradox of measuring success of nations in elite sport. Belgeo. Revue Belge De Géographie, 2, 217–234. De Bosscher, V., Shibli, S., & Weber, A. C. (2019). Is prioritisation of funding in elite sport effective? An analysis of the investment strategies in 16 countries. European Sport Management Quarterly, 19(2), 221–243.

30

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

Discussion with Josep Escoda, General Secretary of the ASPC, January 2022. Henry, I., Dowling, M., Ko, L. M., & Brown, P. (2020). Challenging the new orthodoxy: A critique of SPLISS and variable-oriented approaches to comparing sporting nations. European Sport Management Quarterly, 20(4), 520–536. Hong, F. (1997). Commercialism and sport in China: Present situation and future expectations. Journal of Sport Management, 11(4), 343–354. http://www.uci.ch/mm/Document/News/Rulesandregulation/16/82/39/2ROA-20160101-E_English.pdf. Retrieved in April 2020. International Olympic Committee. (2015). Olympic Charter. art. 57, International Olympic Committee. Interview with Mostapha Khalil, volunteer for the Egyptian Olympic Committee, June 2016. Nassif, N. (2018). World ranking of countries in elite sport. Rivista Di Diritto Ed Economia Dello Sport, 14(2), 55–75. Official website of Alexa. https://www.alexa.com. Retrieved in April 2020. Official website of the Association of Sport Performance Centers (ASPC). https:/ /sportperformancecentres.org/. Retrieved in September 2022. Official website of the Association of Tennis Professionals. https://www.atptour. com. Retrieved in 2021. Official website of the Badminton World Federation. https://bwfbadminton. com/rankings/3/bwf-world-team-rankings?short=1. Retrieved in 2021. Official website of boxrec. https://boxrec.com/en/ratings. Retrieved in 2021. Official website of the company Infostrada. http://sportaccord.infostradasports. com/asp/lib/TheASP.asp?PageID=1580. Retrieved in April 2020. Official website of the Entertainment and Sports Programming Network. https:/ /www.espn.com/boxing/story/_/id/12494121/division-division-rankingsindex. Retrieved in 2021. Official website of the European Union of Football Association. https://www. uefa.com/uefaeuro-2020/news/025b-0ef35fa07210-adb80b5eb2e7-1000-uefa-postpones-euro-2020/. Retrieved in May 2020. Official website of the Global Association of the International Sports Federation. https://gaisf.org/mission-and-vision/. Retrieved in April 2020 Official website of the Greatestsportingnation ranking. https://greatestsportin gnation.com/content/how-it-works. Retrieved in March 2022. Official website of the Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/ apr/04/olympic-football-age-limit-raised-to-24-tokyo-games-postponement. Retrieved in March 2022. Official website of the International Basketball Federation. http://www.fiba.bas ketball/documents/rankingmen/howitworks. Retrieved in 2021.

1

MEASUREMENT OF COUNTRIES’ PERFORMANCES …

31

Official website of the International Cycling Union. http://www.uci.ch/mm/ Document/News/Rulesandregulation/16/82/39/2-ROA-20160101-E_E nglish.pdf. Retrieved in 2021. Official website of the International Fencing Federation. https://fie.org/ath letes/general-ranks/?category=S&weapon=E&gender=F&event=I&season= 2020. Retrieved in 2021. Official website of the International Football Federation. https://resources.fifa. com/image/upload/fifa-world-ranking-technical-explanation-revision.pdf?clo udid=edbm045h0udbwkqew35a. Retrieved in 2021. Official website of the International Hockey Federation. http://www.fih.ch/ media/13342090/fih-world-ranking-system-january-2020.pdf. Retrieved in 2021. Official website of the International Judo Federation. https://www.ijf.org/wrl_ nations. Retrieved in 2021. Official website of the International Olympic Committee. https://www.olympi c.org. Retrieved in March 2022; https://olympics.com/ioc/faq/sports-pro gramme-and-results/the-olympic-programme-comprises-sports-disciplinesand-events-what-is-the-difference-between-the-three. Retrieved in April 2020. Official website of the International Powerboating Union. https://www.uim. sport/StandingAndPoints.aspx. Retrieved in April 2020. Official website of the International Table Tennis Federation. https://ranking. ittf.com/#/rankings/list/SEN/M;TEAM/2020/6w. Retrieved in 2021. Official website of the International Tennis Federation. https://www.itftennis. com/en/. Retrieved in 2021. Official website of the National Broadcasting Company. http://www.nbc olympics.com/news/rio-olympic-boxing-headgear-scoring-system-3-pros. Retrieved in April 2020. Official website of the Radio Monte-Carlo. https://rmcsport.bfmtv.com/ divers/estanguet-ce-classement-met-en-lumiere-le-systeme-francais-361900. html. Retrieved in April 2020. Official website of the Ring Magazine. https://www.ringtv.com/ratings/. Retrieved in 2021. Official website of the Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/ world/asia_pacific/tokyo-olympics-to-be-canceled-if-not-held-in-2021-iocchief-says/2020/05/21/14111756-9b31-11ea-ad79-eef7cd734641_story. html. Retrieved in May 2020. Official website of the World Archery. https://worldarchery.org/world-ranking. Retrieved in 2021. Official website of the World Golf Ranking. http://www.owgr.com/events. Retrieved in 2021. Official website of the World Women Golf Ranking. https://www.rolexrankings. com/. Retrieved in 2021.

32

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

Official website of the Wimbledon Tennis open. https://www.wimbledon.com/ en_GB/news/articles/2020-04-01/cancellation_of_the_championships_2 020.html. Retrieved in April 2020. Official website of the Women Tennis Association. https://www.wtatennis.com/ . Retrieved in 2021. Official website of the World Association of Kickboxing Organizations. http:/ /wako.sport/en/page/wako-rules-and-regulations/32/. Retrieved in April 2020. Official website of the World Bank. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/ NY.GDP.MKTP.CD?most_recent_value_desc=true&year_high_desc=true. Retrieved in April 2020. Official website of the World Golf Ranking. http://www.owgr.com/events. Retrieved in September 2021. Official website of the World Health Organization. https://covid19.who.int/ ?gclid=CjwKCAjwmrn5BRB2EiwAZgL9ots-GRimo1Hmok0c9OwGNBWc6 84RD6Z1Z859yArd0GME4Kx74wzruBoCZBQQAvD_BwE. Retrieved in 2020. Official website of the World Ranking of Countries in Elite Sport, www.worlds portranking.info. Retrieved in March 2022. Registration certificate number 2553 signed on August 17th 2017 by the Lebanese Ministry of Economy and Commerce. Sam, M. P., & Jackson, S. J. (2015). Sport and small states: The myths, limits and contradictions of the legend of David and Goliath. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 7 (3), 319–327. Sotiriadou, K. P., & Shilbury, D. (2009). Australian elite athlete development: An organisational perspective. Sport Management Review, 12(3), 137–148. The website “Essentiallysports”. https://www.essentiallysports.com/boxingnews-how-many-pro-boxers-are-competing-in-the-tokyo-olympics-2021/; https://www.essentiallysports.com/wta-atp-tennis-news-are-tennis-playersawarded-rankings-points-at-tokyo-olympics-2020/. Retrieved in March 2022.

CHAPTER 2

Literature Review on the Analysis of the Factors Behind Countries’ Success in Elite Sport

Abstract This chapter first delves into what the authors have written in terms of macro-level factors, which include the political, economic, demographic, geographic, and cultural variables. It then covers the research made on the meso-level factors related to the elite sport policies regulated, coordinated, and implemented by the main National Sport Governing Bodies, the National Olympic Committees, and the National Sport Federations. The third part of this literature review is related to the micro-level factors that concern the athletes’ close environment: Parents, partners, and coaches. Keywords Literature · Countries · Success · Elite sport

2.1

Introduction

This chapter presents a literature review on the analysis of the factors behind countries’ success in elite sport. Several authors have suggested analyzing the country’s political, economic, demographical, geographical, and cultural situation at a macro-level in order to understand its performance. Others have also advocated that more specific factors at the meso-levels should be taken into account in a comprehensive model of a © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 N. Nassif and M. Raspaud, National Success in Elite Sport, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38997-9_2

33

34

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

country’s success. The meso-level factors are related to the policy implemented and/or coordinated by the different national sport governing bodies such as the ministries in charge of sport, National Olympic Committees (NOC), and National Sports Federations (NSF). The third part of this literature review is related to the micro-level factors that concern the athletes and their entourage constituted by their families, coaches, medical staff, and managers. Their coaching and administrative staff could be in their schools, universities, clubs, or any other institution in charge of their training.

2.2

Macro-Level Factors 2.2.1

Political Factors

In the search for international recognition, sport proposes a much more accessible alternative to economic and military battles. For Colomb (1992), preparing a team to succeed in international competitions costs much less money and causes much less destruction than forming an army and can therefore be used as a political message by all the countries, regardless of their size and strength. Indeed, according to Hong (2012), the budget for elite athletes in South Korea is lower than 1% than the one consecrated for their army. Sport is actually a variable for a country’s soft power. According to Nye (2008, p. 29), soft power is the “ability to shape the preferences of others to get what you want without threats or payment”. To date, there are three known soft power indexes: 1. The “Soft Power 30” established by Facebook and the Center on Public Diplomacy of the University of South California (Softpower30, 2020). This ranking exists since 2015. In the last edition of 2019, the methodology was based on 65% objective and 35% subjective statistics. The objective statistics were aiming to measure the following variables (with their weights in parenthesis): Culture (12.5%); Digital (13.1%); Education (14.3%); Enterprise (18.7%); Engagement (20.6%); Government (20.8%). The subjective statistics were based on polling data extracted from questionnaires distributed in 25 countries (Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Egypt, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan,

2

LITERATURE REVIEW ON THE ANALYSIS OF THE FACTORS …

35

Malaysia, Mexico, Poland, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Spain, South Africa, Sweden, Thailand, Turkey, GB, and the United States of America). Those questionnaires were aiming to measure the following variables (with their weights in parenthesis): Global culture (5.2%); Luxury goods (7.6%); Technology products (8.3%); Cuisine (12%); Livability (15.3%); Friendliness (20.6%); Foreign policy (31%). The weightings for the objective and subjective variables are changing every year without a clear explanation; a fact that somehow affects the solidity of this ranking. However, this new index aims at measuring the attractiveness of a country and, therefore, gives an idea on a country’s soft power. Sport, through the Olympic Medal Table and the FIFA ranking, is considered in the “culture” category along with the “total number of tourist arrivals”, “average spend per tourist”, “number of films appearing in major film festivals”, “number of foreign correspondents in the country”, “number of UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) World Heritages sites”, “Annual museum attendance of global top 100”, “size of music market”, “number of top 10 albums in foreign countries”, “quality of national air carrier”, and “Michelin-starred restaurants”. 2. The “Soft Power Index”, formerly established by Ernst and Young and now developed by the Nanyang Technological University (NTU) of Singapore (NTU, 2019). In the 2019 version of this index, only the Group of 7 (G7: United States of America, Germany, France, GB, Italy, Canada, and Japan) and emerging economies (such as China, Brazil, Mexico, and Russia) were evaluated. There are four general variables used to calculate this ranking (unlike the Soft Power 30, they are not weighted): • • • • •

Image and Branding. Attraction and Influence. Diplomacy and Outreach. Integrity and Value System. Sport, through the Olympic medal table, is part of the “Image and Branding” category, along with other indicators such as “Time’s 100 Most Influential People”, “exports of audiovisual services”, “most admired companies”, “Michelin starred restaurants”, and “university rankings”.

36

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

3. The “Global Soft Power Index”, established in 2020 by the international brand valuation and strategy consultancy “Brand Finance” (Brand Finance, 2022). Two surveys are conducted to calculate this ranking: • One for the general public covering over 75,000 residents of 102 countries representing all the continents of the world, which has a weight of 90%. • Another to specialist audiences from 47 countries representing categories considered related to soft power: business leaders, market analysts, politicians, academics, think-thanks, NonGovernmental Organizations (NGO), and journalists. This part of the survey weighs 10%. • Sport, through a category entitled “Leaders in sports”, basically showing how countries are perceived as being successful in sport, is part of the Culture & Heritage, along with other indicators such as tourism, food, fine arts, literature, music, film, gaming, and fashion. These surveys include the following items: • Awareness and familiarity; measuring how known the nation brands are by people. • Overall influence; the degree to which a nation is seen to have influence. • Overall reputation; reflecting how positive the reputation of a country is globally. • Performance on the core seven soft power pillars (Business & Trade, Governance, International Relations, Culture & Heritage, Media & Communication, Education & Science, and People & Values). • Performance in tackling the COVID-19 pandemic (included for the first time in 2021). Sport, therefore, has an impact on the “Soft Power 30”, “Soft Power Index”, and the “Global Soft Power Index”. But it is very difficult to measure it with concrete numbers. Indeed, in the three rankings mentioned here, sport is actually not weighted inside the categories where it belongs, it is rather included within “culture” in the “Soft Power

2

LITERATURE REVIEW ON THE ANALYSIS OF THE FACTORS …

37

30”, “Image and Branding” in the “Soft Power Index”, or “Culture & Heritage” in the “Global Soft Power Index”. For Nye (2011), sport is a powerful soft power tool as soft power is based on sympathy. A country succeeding in international sport competitions will attract the masses of other countries, and once the latter are hooked, their leaders will admire the succeeding country. For these reasons, investing in sport interests many countries. During the Cold War, the Soviet Union’s massive investment in Olympic sport was driven by its will “to demonstrate the superiority of Soviet style communism over U.S.-style capitalism (Riordan, 1993)”. A former European communist country, East Germany, adopted the same strategy (Green & Houlihan, 2005, p. 1). Well before that, the German Nazi party used the 1936 Olympics to promote its ideology (Anderson et al., 2020). The Italian Fascist party did the same when Italy organized and won the 1934 Football World Cup with Benito Mussolini, leader of the party, bribing the referees to assure his country’s victory (Anderson et al., 2020). Using sport for political messages was also the case of Egypt, which involvement in international competitions in the 1950s was this new emergent regional power’s way of demonstrating its refusal to western imperialism and colonialism (Henry et al., 2003). In Iran, the gold medal won in the 1956 Melbourne Olympic Games by the wrestler Gholamreza Takhti, who was politically connected to the National Iranian Front, was a symbol of opposition to the Shah and the British imperialism (Chehabi, 1995). Newly independent countries like Israel, Qatar, Namibia, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Senegal, Benin, Congo, and Cameroon also elaborated national sport programs to obtain international political recognition (Adami, 2004; Bouchet & Kaach, 2004; Chappell, 2005; Galily, 2003; Reiche, 2015). For Reiche (2015), as soon as countries become independent, the branding of their nation-states becomes a priority in their foreign policy. And sporting success is a considerable key element in this strategy. In the 1960 Rome Olympic Games, for the first time in its history, France won zero gold medals and finished in the 25th position; the worst record in its Olympics history. This failure called the attention of French President General De Gaulle who considered that a country with the historical “weight” of France should succeed in sport, which is an indicator of the strength of a country (Callède, 2002). In 1961, the French government undertook a series of reforms to build sport

38

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

facilities in the different French regions. By also imposing physical education as a compulsory subject in the French educational curriculum, it developed a mass of participants that could train in all sports for free in the different villages, towns, and cities of France. Elite sport centers in all French territories, including those overseas, were then established. These centers allowed the best French athletes scouted by the NSFs to live in a place where they could balance between intensive training and their studies. These measures allowed France to become one of the Olympic leaders, finishing in the top ten in the last ten summer editions (the last to date being that of 2020). This reaction to a sport defeat was also seen in Russia when Vladimir Putin implemented an elite sport policy following the 2012 London Olympics where he considered Russia’s results disappointing, finishing fourth in the Olympic Medal Table (Andreff, 2013). For Grix and Carmichael (2012), governments seek to win in sport for international prestige, to instill a “feel-good factor” among the population, and to increase the participation among the masses, which will consequently lead to a healthier nation. Green and Houlihan (2005, p. 1) attributed to sport, in addition to the “feel-good factor”, the ability to be a key player in a country’s diplomacy and economic boost through the organization of major sport events. The “feel-good factor” was also raised by Bergsgard et al., (2009, p. 1) highlighting the “intense attention” the public gives to the performance of clubs and national teams in international competitions, when they undertook comparative studies between the sport policies in Canada, England, Germany, and Norway. De Rycke and De Bosscher (2019) gave accurate examples on the feel-good factor when they compared the joy Egypt’s qualification for the 2018 Football World Cup, 38 years after its last qualification, brought to the country, to the despair caused by the elimination of powerhouses like Italy and the Netherlands among their population. By going through a literature review on the papers published on elite sport, they have identified ten themes related to the societal benefits of elite sport: Social equity and inclusion; collective identity and pride; ethics and fair play; feel good and passion; fans and media attraction; international prestige and image; athletes’ ability and quality of life; sport participation and health; sponsors and commercial activity; and local consumption and living conditions. Three of these categories are directly

2

LITERATURE REVIEW ON THE ANALYSIS OF THE FACTORS …

39

linked to the governments’ interest in succeeding in international competitions: Collective identity and pride; feel good and passion; international prestige and image. Reiche (2018) has shown how Belgium’s victory against Brazil in the 2018 World Cup quarter final and its third position in the final ranking has strengthened the Belgian identity by bringing the Wallons and Flemings together. Andersen and Ronglan (2012, p. 39 and p. 48) stated that both Norway and Denmark have actually developed their elite sport policies in search for international prestige. For Green and Houlihan (2005, p. 2), the establishment of the Australian Institute of Sport (AIS) in 1981 and the Australian Sports Commission (ASC) in 1985 was driven by the Australian government’s will to have the country succeed in international competitions. According to Lezama et al. (2015), as a part of the project to develop Brazil’s “sports diplomacy”, the Brazilian national council for sports education implemented a long-term strategy aimed at winning medals in the 2016 Olympics which were to be organized in a Brazilian major city, Rio de Janeiro. These steps were taken because despite being a football powerhouse, Brazil has always struggled to win medals in the Olympics. Tinaz (2019, p. 123) has also highlighted how Turkey promoted the success of its athletes with the aim of gaining international prestige in the beginning of the twenty-first century. Reiche (2015) conducted a similar study on Qatar demonstrating how this small state invested on sporting success as a tool for domestic and foreign policy. Besides organizing mega-sporting events, one of the main aspects of this strategy was winning medals in international sport competitions. For Reiche, Qatar’s investment on sport success goes beyond the development of its soft power since it strengthens the country’s national security by solidifying the hegemony of the ruling monarchy. In fact, this idea was highlighted by Bian (2005) who stated that international recognition is very efficient in allowing governments to maintain political stability. For De Bosscher (2008, p. 44), improving reputation through international success may lead in its turn to promoting the political and trading opportunities. A government’s political will to succeed in sport is, therefore, a very efficient tool to develop its soft power, which is a crucial component of foreign policy. In this book, we will argue that political factors are among the major pre-requisites with an impact on a country’s performance in elite sport. They should definitely be completed by several other macro-,

40

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

meso-, and micro-level components. One of these macro-level variables is wealth, which will be further discussed in this literature review. 2.2.2

Economic Factors

The economic environment of elite sport is a very vast field and has become the object of important literature related to concepts such as sponsorship, return on investment, economic impact, television rights, and merchandising (De Rycke & De Bosscher, 2019). This book does not intend to tackle these sub-economic fields, but will only focus on the influence a country’s economy has on countries’ results in elite sport. For Andreff (2013), the rise of China in the 2008 Olympics, when it topped the Olympic Medal Table, was strongly related to its GDP growth. In addition, Russia’s decline in winning medals was due to its economic deterioration after the end of the Cold War. Novikov and Maximenko (1972) have stated that successes in international competitions are defined by a country’s socio-economic development. For them, sport is a social phenomenon and therefore the people’s living conditions determine the development of sports. The importance of wealth has also been raised by Kiviaho and Makela (1978). They stated that countries that have important economic resources have higher chances to succeed in the Olympics. For Rathke and Woitek (2008), wealth and the utilization of these resources determine success. An optimal use of these resources resides in financial support, training methods, and organization and culture. Although primarily sport economists, Rathke and Woitek considered that wealth, which is a macro-level factor, cannot lead to success if not followed by meso- and micro-level strategies. Den Butter and Van Der Tak (1995) found that the medals won by countries in the Olympics are strongly correlated to their wealth. This was confirmed by Johnson and Ali (2000) who said that richer countries can send more athletes and, therefore, have higher chances to win medals. For Bian (2005), wealthy countries have the capacity to win medals in a higher number of sports. This was also highlighted by Tcha and Pershin (2003). By analyzing the results of the Olympics between 1952 and 2004, Lui and Suen (2008) have found that the income per capita, which is a measure of wealth, is one of the main factors leading to the winning of medals. By looking at the 1984 and 2004 Olympics, Van Tuyckom and

2

LITERATURE REVIEW ON THE ANALYSIS OF THE FACTORS …

41

Joreskog (2012) showed that economic development has a high effect in countries’ success in the Olympics. By taking a sample of 118 countries over 24 editions of the Olympic Games, Kuper and Sterken (2001) have also highlighted the importance of income per capita to win the highest amounts of medals in the Olympics. For them, income per capita improves athletes’ training and health conditions, which will lead to success. Emrich et al. (2012) have stated that in richer countries, a higher number of people can have the opportunities to engage in sports, thus raising the opportunities to draw an important number of talented athletes. Moosa and Smith (2004) showed that expenditure on health, which results from wealth, is one of the strongest variables of success. For Green and Houllihan (2005, p. 1), with the exception of Ethiopia, successful nations in the Olympics are either rich industrial countries or former/ current communist countries which invested abundantly on sport. For Andersen and Ronglan (2012, p. 23), wealthy countries have more chances to succeed as they have more resources for research, development, and facilities. However, they consider that GDP per capita does not necessarily provide an advantage. Indeed, they have found in their book that from 1990 to 2010, the Norwegian GDP per capita was much higher than those of Sweden and Denmark, yet the improvements of Norway’s results occurred between 1988 and the beginning of the 1990s, at a time when Norway’s GDP per capita was the same as those of Sweden and Denmark. Norway’s results were due to the budget set to succeed in the 1994 Olympics that were to be organized in the city of Lillehammer in Norway. For these games, the Norwegian Olympic Committee received 23 million euros. This money was distributed to the Norwegian NSFs that improved their athletes’ training conditions (Andersen & Ronglan, 2012, p. 37). Henry et al. (2020) dived deeper into the real impact on the GDP per capita by saying that it is not mainly the national wealth that will explain countries’ performances, but how much financial resources are consecrated to elite sport. This idea advocated by Henry et al. will be explored through correlations calculi between the WRCES and GDP per capita in chapters III and IV of this book. As we have seen in this part of the literature review, a country’s economic wealth has a high impact on success in elite sport. Some scholars we cited above have also advocated that population is another macrofactor determining international sport success. Those demographic factors will be discussed in the third part of the macro-factors.

42

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

2.2.3

Demographic Factors

For Bernard and Busse (2004), demography is not a major factor. They showed that, in the 1996 Summer Olympics in Atlanta, China, India, Indonesia, and Bangladesh, which counted for 43% of the global population, only won 6% of the total medals. They explained that “first, countries cannot send athletes in proportion to their population for each event where each country is determined a number of athletes by the IOC in negotiation with the country’s Olympic committee. As a result, not all the Olympic caliber athletes from a large country are able to participate”. Den Butter and Van der Tak (1995) had a similar theory, “A country with two times as many inhabitants as another country is not expected to win two times as many Olympic medals. Or in the economists’ jargon: the ‘production’ of Olympic medals is apparently subject to diseconomies of scale with respect to population. This may partly be caused by the fact that each country is only allowed to delegate a limited number of participants per sport events”. De Bosscher (2008, p. 44) supported this idea by saying that the USA, with a population of 296 million, can only send the same number of athletes as GB, with a population of 60 million. Kuper and Sterken (2001) found that the impact of a large population on sport performance is subject to debate. They gave the examples of the world’s second most populated country, India, what had a little success in the Olympics, and the eighth most populated country, Bangladesh, which has never won a medal in the history of the games. Bian (2005) went even further. He said that if the economic resources do not increase, adding more athletes will reduce the funding for each of them, thus deteriorating their training conditions and affecting their performances. For Bian, population will only have an impact if supported by economic wealth. Kiviaho and Makela (1978) also support the idea of population being an asset if the economic resources are available. In his research to predict the performance of Russia and China in the 2014 Winter Olympic Games, Andreff (2013) has found that the size of the population is a determining factor. Houllihan and Zeng (2015) have also highlighted the importance of population by showing that in the 2012 London Summer Olympics, 50% of the less populated countries won only 11% of the medals. Johnson and Ali (2000) also think that a large population provides a larger pool of talent from which an important number of successful athletes can emerge. They showed that by stating that in the 1956 Summer Olympics Games in Melbourne, nations that

2

LITERATURE REVIEW ON THE ANALYSIS OF THE FACTORS …

43

won at least one medal averaged six times the populations of countries that won no medals. In the 1996 Games in Atlanta, this difference was reduced, but the medal-winning nations still had an average population five times higher than those that did not win any medals. Although they strongly support the idea that a large population provides an advantage for success, they say that this effect is reduced with extremely large populations. Indeed, since there is a quota of the number of teams a nation can send in each sport, “large nations will not be able to send as many athletes as their populations would suggest”. For Pfau (2006), while sportswriters make predictions for the Olympics by analyzing the skills of the competitors, economists look at the economic and demographic characteristics and the past results of a country. Economists use this approach to avoid being misled by the competitions’ uncertainties caused by non-controllable variables such as injuries, “bad days”, individual mistakes, among others. Looking at the results of previous Olympics will provide average results that consider these uncertainties. The larger population from which a larger number of talented athletes will be drawn will then constitute the second solid variable for success. Pfau used the previous results, the population and the wealth of a country to predict the results of the 2006 Olympics. He found out that population has a lesser impact in the Winter Olympics than in the Summer Olympics. He explained this factor by stating that “population may be less important because skills for winter sports are specialized to colder regions of the world, particularly Scandinavia, which tend to have smaller populations”. By analyzing the results of the Winter and Summer Olympics from 1992 to 2010, Emrich et al. (2012) have found that a large population offers the advantage of increasing the probability of having a pool of talented athletes. With a higher number of athletes, the competition to qualify for the Olympics will be fiercer and the qualified athletes will have systematically better performance standards. It also increases the sport market and thus the opportunities to attract media attention, which will increase the athletes’ financial income and allow them to train better. They also stated that having a larger ratio of the population living in big cities will encourage politicians and sport clubs to offer facilities allowing citizens to train in a higher number of sports, thus increasing the chances of success. However, they pointed out that winter sports are expensive and require specific facilities. For this reason, they could only be practiced by a limited number of people, so a large population will not have a

44

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

high relevance. By opposition, most summer sports do not require specific facilities and could thus involve a larger number of participants, which systematically raises the importance of a large population. If there is a very strong advocacy among scholars on the impact of the political and economic factors on countries’ performance in elite sport, there is more debate between them concerning the importance of the population. The fourth macro-factor that will be examined now is the geography. 2.2.4

Geographic Factors

The literature on the impact of geography in countries’ success in elite sport is smaller than that related to the political, economic, and demographic factors. For Emrich et al. (2012), the area will contribute to the winning of medals. Indeed, big countries will have more diversity in their natural climate and environment, and can, therefore, offer more opportunities for their citizens to practice different sports. This will allow them to send more athletes to the Olympics and increase their chance to win medals. In addition, Emrich et al. (2012) consider the climate to have more impact on winter than summer sports. Johnson and Ali (2000) also think that this climate provides an advantage for countries that host an event. For Andreff (2013), the presence of snow, which is a direct result of a geographic location, is a determinant of success in winter sports. However, using the examples of Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan which are countries that have snow but no winter sports facilities, he considered that the climatic conditions are insufficient for success in winter sports if proper infrastructure is unavailable. The impact of the absence of snow on Winter Olympics’ results has also been verified by Reiche (2016, p. 78) who showed that no African country has ever won a medal in the winter games. But like Andreff (2013), he says that without the proper facilities, snow cannot be an asset for success. He gave the example of Bolivia which has mountains that reach 6,542 m high but only one very small ski resort. Bolivia was absent from the Winter Olympics from 1992 to 2018. In the latter, it participated with only two athletes, one in Alpine skiing named Simon Breitfuss Kammerlander and another in cross country skiing, named Timo Juhani Gronlund. Kammerlander and Gronlund were born and raised in Austria

2

LITERATURE REVIEW ON THE ANALYSIS OF THE FACTORS …

45

and Finland respectively, and had to go through the process of naturalization to compete for Bolivia (Reuters, 2018). Reiche (2016, p. 79) also gave the counter-example of Qatar, a country without snow or mountain which started to promote ice hockey, ice skating, and curling in 2014. For Reiche (2016, p. 79), the area does not have an important impact on a country’s overall performance in the Summer Olympics, but it does have one on specific sports. He gave the example of Lebanon, which has a small area of 10,452 km2 with a high density of 437 inhabitants in one square kilometer. Due to these conditions, Lebanon has only one golf course which will lead to modest results in this sport. He also gave the example of sailing, where non-access to the sea or large lakes will lead to challenges in achieving positive results in this sport. As we have seen, the literature related to the impact of geography on countries’ performance is rather limited. The authors cited in this part commonly found that geography has an impact on specific sports due to environmental factors such as snow or sea, but there are limited examples on the importance of the country’s size. The last macro-factor to be examined is culture. 2.2.5

Cultural Factors

Kupper and Sterken (2001) have stated the hypothesis that sport culture can be a variable for national success in sport. If sport is part of a country’s social activities, there will be more resources for training. Accordingly, if success in sport is praised, athletes will be more motivated. However, they stated that this factor cannot be easily measured and has not been used by scholars before 2001, the year during which they published their work on the analysis of countries’ participation and performance since 1896. Andreff (2013) has then exposed the case of cultural preferences in some countries that lead to specialization and success in specific sports. He gave numerous examples such as Bulgaria, Turkey, and Armenia in weightlifting, the Netherlands and Belgium in cycling, Ethiopia and Kenya in long distance, and the USA in sprints… However, like Kupper and Sterken (2001), Andreff considers it challenging to identify the reasons why some countries get hooked into certain types of sports. Thomas, a French expert in physical education and sport, observed that “a champion is a genetic program immersed in a favorable social environment (Thomas, 1993, p. 88)”. This social environment can be apprehended as culture, which consists of three variables: national at a

46

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

macro-level, social at a meso-level, and familial at a micro-level. The constant interaction between those three variables makes the understanding of culture very complex. Balandier (1967), who underlined the existence of 250 different definitions of culture, has defined it as: “A system of behaviors, the shaping of which remains largely unconscious, which is imposed on individuals and, at the same time, constitutes a system of communication between these same individuals”. Balandier’s definition of culture, which includes the terms “system”, “imposed”, and “communication”, shows how potentially predominant cultural factors are for a country’s development and success in elite sport. In this part of the chapter, we will first go through the three different levels of culture: national (macro), social (meso), and familial (micro). A- National Historically, Jean-Marie Brohm (1976) links the emergence of modern sport to the nascent industrial capitalist society of the British eighteenth century. With the invention of the stopwatch and the possibility of measuring time, running races and related bets were developed. For Brohm (1976, p. 45), “Sport is an institutionalized system of competitive practices, predominantly physical, delimited, codified, conventionally regulated whose avowed objective is, on the basis of a comparison of performances, exploits, demonstrations, physical performances, nominate the best competitor (the champion) or record the best performance (the record). Sport is therefore a system of generalized, universal physical competitions, by principle open to all, which extends in space (all nations, all social groups, all individuals can participate) or in time (comparisons records between various successive generations) and whose objective is to measure, to compare the performance of the human body conceived as a constantly perfectible power. Sport is therefore ultimately the cultural system which records objective human bodily progress”. Brohm believes in a structural homology between sport and capitalism, the foundation of which is, in both cases, the production and improvement of the performance of production, whether corporeal or industrial. Sport, therefore, like industrial capitalism, is now globalized, and as such constitutes a global culture that weighs on and irradiates all lifestyles throughout the world. Meanwhile, it must be taken into account that this global culture can be impacted by national cultures, which implies that sport will not be enjoyed and invested in evenly across the planet.

2

LITERATURE REVIEW ON THE ANALYSIS OF THE FACTORS …

47

Therefore, what is a national culture? Simply speaking, anyone traveling around the world will easily see that cultures diverge from one country to another, not only in lifestyles or the “arts of living”, but also through aspects such as the relationship to time, space, and the body, among others. These singularities participate in the construction of a “soul”, be it French, Italian, or American, etc. For Benedict and Weill (1950), each culture has a predominant approved personality type, as if individuals reflect the culture as a whole. Thus, every individual brings diverse potentialities at birth, and the environment selects some of them, particularly by presenting the individual with patterns they must follow in order to adapt to the life of the group. Thus, there is a relationship between the psychic life of individuals and the culture of the group defined as an organizing structure: each society “chooses” or selects certain possible human potentialities and by accentuating them, ignores, and discredits others. A functional relationship, therefore, ties the structure of personality and society. Each culture has a characteristic configuration which represents the significant unit rather than some trait or institution whose variability is almost infinite. After studying the cultural characteristics of Native American populations, Benedict and Weill (1950) have found that the Pimas were marked by individualism, violence, and extreme behaviors, while the Pueblos were conformists, with balanced behaviors. Similarly, the Kwakiutls were domineering and bellicose, unlike the Zuni who were calm and conformist. From these observations, Benedict and Weill (1950) constructed a binary typology opposing the “Apollonian cultures”, valuing and inciting extreme or excessive behavior, and the “Dionysiac cultures” accentuating balanced behaviors. In addition, the first social element that influences sport success is the culture of the country where a person lives. The need for success or achievement seems to be a common factor in modern societies. However, there are differences in collective success between countries with the same economic development, a fact we should try to explain. (Thomas, 1993, p. 82). We will, therefore, propose a “culturalist” approach to the production of national sports performance based on the idea of the existence of a “basic personality” (Kardiner, 1969), according to which “the Ego is a cultural precipitate”, because the structure of personality would be closely dependent on the characteristic culture of a particular society, understanding by culture the system of fundamental values of the society.

48

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

Thus, for McClelland and McClelland (1961), certain societies, such as the USA, consider achievement (a concept meaning both performance and success, generally rendered by achievement) a central value. In these societies, the need for achievement tends to be a fundamental component of their individuals’ personality. Can this be considered among the explanations for their international sports dominance? Riesman and Denney (1951) described the transformation of English rugby by American culture into a different sport: American football. It contains, according to the authors, the traits of North American culture: vigor, clashes, and a strong focus on the individual. The promoter of baseball in the United States, A. G. Spalding, considered this sport the very essence of the country: “To enter upon a deliberate argument to prove that Baseball is our National Game; that it has all the attributes of American origin, American character and unbounded public favor in America, seems a wort of supererogation. It is to undertake the elucidation of patent fact; the sober demonstration of an axiom; it is like a solemn declaration that two plus two equal four” (Spalding, quoted by Guttmann, 1978, p. 95). Spalding went even further as he believed baseball was “the exponent of American Courage, Confidence, Combativeness; American Dash, Discipline, Determination; American Energy, Eagerness, Enthusiasm; American Pluck, Persistency, Performance; American Spirit, Sagacity, Success; American Vim, Vigor, Virility” (Spalding, quoted by Levine, 1986,p. 99). The same could be said about Brazil and football (Lever, 1983). B- Social Within the same nation, social groups will differentiate themselves from one other on the basis of their values, practices, and lifestyles, although they share the dominant values characterizing their nation. Forms of hierarchies are formed in which sport is one of the actors. Thus, some sports are invested in more than others by certain social categories, not only for “distinction” (Bourdieu, 1979), but also in a much more unconscious logic of social response to the construction of dispositions. Indeed, the dispositions with regard to sport, which are themselves a dimension of a particular relationship to one’s own body, are part of the unity of the system of dispositions, the habitus, which is the principle of lifestyles (Bourdieu, 1980, p. 189), i.e. the coherent set of the behaviors and social practices of individuals belonging to the same social “class”.

2

LITERATURE REVIEW ON THE ANALYSIS OF THE FACTORS …

49

Accordingly, Pociello (1981), through the construction of a typology of sports, identifies four forms of privileged bodily investment: strength, energy, grace, and reflexes. Beyond the principle of social distinction, individuals, following the values incorporated within their social “class” and based on constructed bodily dispositions, will therefore invest in one sport rather than another, as this sport will correspond to them in terms of representation and physical capacity. This does not prevent individuals from different social classes from practicing the same sport in the same sport association. Here again, however, the dispositions built up during education in their social environment lead to differentiated ways of body engagement in the form of playing tennis for example, a game based on energy or reflexes (Waser, 1989), or in a sport like rugby, based on power or velocity (Pociello, 1983). Guttmann (1978), on the other hand, takes up a Weberian view of social organization: secularism, equality, specialization, rationalism, bureaucratic organization, and quantification, elements which he believes are interdependent and systematically linked. He recalls that modern sports originate from Protestant England and spread more rapidly among Protestants than among Catholics (France being an important exception). He also stated that during the past years, Protestants have been more inclined than Catholics to get involved in sports and become world-class athletes. Here, Guttmann refers to Luschen and Lenk who highlighted the overrepresentation of Protestants in sports in Germany (see Table 2.1) and in Olympic competitions (see Table 2.2) during the 1960s and 1970s. In light of these data, Guttmann points out that one is tempted to refer to Max Weber’s concept of “secular asceticism” in order to explain disparities in the rate of participation and achievement through the self-discipline of physical training, a self-discipline which can be considered equivalent to the delayed gratification necessary for the accumulation of capital and the reinvestment of profits. He also notes the very strong development of sport in Japan and the East European communist countries because of the appropriation of science. C- Familial As stated by Thomas (1993, p. 88), “a champion is a genetic program immersed in a favorable social environment”. This social environment, below the national level on one hand and the social on the other, is the family unit. It is in this framework, along with school (Kardiner, 1969),

50

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

Table 2.1 Sport and religion in West Germany (Luschen & Lenk, quoted by Guttmann, 1978, p. 83)

Protestants Catholics Others Number

General Population (%)

Members of Sports Clubs (%)

Members Involved in Track & Swimming (%)

Members in High-Level Track & Swimming (%)

52 44 4

60 37 3 1880

67 31 2 366

73 26 1 111

Table 2.2 Sport and religion at the Olympic games (Luschen & Lenk, quoted by Guttmann, 1978, p. 83) Share of Olympic Gold Medals (%) Protestants Catholics Mohammedans Buddhists, Shintoists Jews Others

54.5 40 1.6 1.2 1 1.6

Share of World’s Religious Population (%) 7.6 23.6 15.5 7.3 0.4 45.4

that children shape themselves: they develop their language, build their relationship with others, incorporate values, and construct their relationship to their body. It is therefore during this stage of early childhood that the interest in sport, its practice, or its viewership, is structured: if the social and familial environment are favorable, the child will be more inclined to imitate parental and/or family models. Then, socialization via a sports club that meets the aspirations of the child or adolescent will constitute a favorable framework for practice and, possibly, commitment to performance. In this regard, some family examples are particularly astonishing, such as the Noah family “dynasty”: • The grandfather, Zacharie (Yaoundé, 1937–2017), of Cameroonian origin, was a professional footballer at the Sedan club (1957–1962),

2

LITERATURE REVIEW ON THE ANALYSIS OF THE FACTORS …

51

with which he won the French cup in 1961. An injury put an end to his career in 1962; • The son, Yannick (born in 1960 in Sedan), became a beacon of hope for French tennis at a very young age; he won the RolandGarros Grand Slam in 1983, was ranked 3rd at the ATP in 1986, and won 23 titles in his career before becoming captain of the French Davis Cup team (victory in 1991 and 1996) and Fed Cup (victory in 1997). • The grandson, Joakim (born in 1985 in New York), is a French professional and international basketball player. He won the NCAA championship twice in 2006 and 2007 consecutively with the Florida Gators, before spending a career in the NBA from 2007 to 2020, mainly with the Chicago Bulls (2007–2016) and the New York Nicks (2016–2018). He was named NBA Defensive Player of the Year in 2014. Research carried out on the family and social environments of highlevel athletes shows that sport is generally a central element of the lifestyle of families. Most of the time, one or both parents practice sports and families are attentive to the sports and school results of their children. Successful results provide symbolic goods (such as cups and medals) which constitute a capital on display in the family’s living room. It is a source of satisfaction for the athletes, comforting them in their investment while also representing a form of pressure which invites them to persevere (Forté, 2006). In the context of the socialization of future sports stars, it has been shown (Kirk & MacPhail, 2003) that the establishment of cordial, even friendly relations between coaches and families encouraged the latter to invest in the club. Similarly, the success of children in their sport leads parents to heavily invest in their sporting careers (Collins & Buller, 2003). This family involvement, often synonymous with a primary sporting socialization of children, contributes to the construction of strong and lasting sporting dispositions, especially given the social benefits for the whole family expressed in exchanges, relationships, and shared emotions (Forté, 2006). Indeed, as pointed out by Forté and Mennesson (2012), several works on elite athletes show that family plays a fundamental role in the development of a vocation, and accordingly in the conversion to a highly restrictive life project of high-level sportsmen or sportswomen. In addition to the criterion of belonging to wealthy socio-cultural backgrounds,

52

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

these two authors highlighted a second one: parental sports capital. In their study of elite French athletes, this allows them to distinguish two types of family: non-heirs (i.e. whose parents have never practiced sport) and heirs (i.e. athletes whose parents practice or have practiced a sporting activity). These heirs represented more than two-thirds (70.6%) of the population of high-level French athletes in 2006. They were a minority in the working classes (38.1%), but on the other hand represented almost all athletes from privileged backgrounds (96%). Other works, of a more longitudinal nature, exploring the different moments in the careers of world-class athletes (double medalists at the Olympic Games and/or world championships), again highlight the family’s fundamental role in supporting athletes. However, they also take into consideration other nuances related to the different moments of the sporting career. Durand-Busch et al. (2004) identify four career phases: the sampling, specializing, investment, and maintenance years. During the first two phases (sampling and specializing), the athletes being young and non-autonomous, the role of the family is crucial, providing unwavering support and encouragement without exerting pressure. Older sports siblings can also represent an ideal role model to strive for. In the following phases (investment and maintenance), when the sportsman or sportswoman reaches both high levels and acquires his/her autonomy (support by the club, the federation, etc.), family roles evolve. Sometimes, fathers who coached their sons or daughters no longer do so, and parents and siblings play a supportive and caring role instead. But these are phases where everyone expects a lot from athletes, hence the pressure and stress on them. All these works, among many others, show the weight of family culture in the (re)production of the sports elite. In most cases, however, although effective in producing sportsmen and women, this family culture is not enough to generate an international or world-class elite athlete if the national culture does not lend itself to it and if specialized institutions are not available for training on one hand and maintaining the motivation for commitment on the other. Those institutions operate at what is known as the meso-level, the object of the study in the next part of this chapter.

2

LITERATURE REVIEW ON THE ANALYSIS OF THE FACTORS …

2.3

53

Meso-Level Factors

The meso-level factors are related to the elite sport policies regulated, coordinated, and implemented by the main National Sport Governing Bodies (NSGBs), which are the governmental delegated bodies for sport (such as the Ministry of Youth and Sports in some countries), the National Olympic Committees (NOCs), and the National Sport Federations (NSFs). In the process of a country strategy to succeed in elite sport, they are the second step after the government’s political decision. For Grix and Carmichael (2012), the success of an elite sport policy is based on what they call the “virtuous cycle of sport”. Succeeding in international competitions will bring prestige, strengthen the sense of identity, increase mass participation, and lead to a healthier population. A large mass of participants will enlarge the pool of talented athletes from which will be selected the champions who will achieve success. This process will start all over again. Green and Oakley (2001) have analyzed elite sport development systems in six wealthy countries: GB, France, Spain, Canada, Australia, and the USA. They have found that these countries have adopted some of the strategies employed by former communist East European countries, mainly the Soviet Union and the German Democratic Republic, based on a system of selection and long-term planning. Green and Oakley advocated the idea that the elite sport systems of the six countries analyzed tend toward a uniform elite sport model. However, they also recognize that although the methods used to succeed are similar, they differ mainly in the sources of funding. They used the examples of France, where governmental intervention is strong, and the USA, where the sport movement is very autonomous from the government. Among these countries, Green and Oakley have showed that Australia is the most stable in terms of results’ improvement. Green (2004) has then reviewed the emergence of sport as a sector of public policy from 1960 to 2002. By taking the example of England, he has focused his studies on the development of elite sport policy in the mid-1990s. For Keech and Nauright (2014), GB was behind Australia, Canada, and the Nordic countries in the formulation of a national sport policy. The major change happened in 1995 with the publication of a document including a set of proposals aimed at promoting sports in the country at a school, community, and elite level (UK Sport, 2020).

54

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

Green and Houlihan (2005, p. 3) have used the advocacy coalition framework (ACF) methodology to analyze the development of elite sport policies in athletics, sailing, and swimming in Australia, Canada, and GB. They adopted the ACF because it considers the historical, political, economic, and ideological national realities. It also looks deeply to the international context in which these changes occur and investigates the power relations between the organizations involved in the policy. Green and Houlihan (2005, p. 3) have undertaken their studies through the analysis of documents and semi-directed interviews to officials from the ASC, Sport Canada, and UK Sport, the highest elite sport authorities in Australia, Canada, and GB. Their research covered issues related to the facilities, coaching programs, sports sciences, and competitions that these three countries are facing. Sotiriadou and Shilbury (2009) have studied the elite sport policies determining Australia’s success in international competitions. Through this analysis, they have identified three main categories of variables that contribute to Australia’s results. They are in the following order: • Sport development interest groups: Federal and state governments, elite sport academies, sponsors, coaches, athletes, administrators, and fans. • Strategies and/or policies: Facilities, development programs, and organization of competitions which improve the skills of the athletes. • Sport development outcomes: Whether direct, like coaching clinics, or indirect, like athletes’ marketability and the financial return in terms of sponsorships and gate receipts. Bergsgard et al. (2009) have also analyzed sport policies related to both mass participation and elite sport in four developed countries: England, Canada (Anglophone part), Germany, and Norway. They chose to perform a comparative analysis on a small number of countries as they believe that extending the number of countries will reduce the quality of the comparison (2009, p. 14). Bergsgard et al., (2009, p. 22) have examined both the process and output of these four countries’ sport policies to understand the extent to which they are affected by their political systems, welfare regimes, and the pressure of globalization. The importance they attributed to the political system reiterates the importance of the political factor as a macro-level component shaping a country’s sport policy.

2

LITERATURE REVIEW ON THE ANALYSIS OF THE FACTORS …

55

Andersen and Ronglan (2012) conducted a comparative analysis on the elite sport policies of the four Nordic countries: Sweden, Denmark, Finland, and Norway. They claim that although these countries have a very similar model in terms of the political, welfare, and social systems, there are certain differences in their elite sport structure (Andersen & Ronglan, 2012, p. 11). They also believe that their successes in winning medals in the Olympics are related to the strong connection between sport and the community in these four countries (Andersen & Ronglan, 2012, p. 13). The Nordic countries sport systems are mainly run by volunteers (Andersen & Ronglan, 2012, p. 19). Commercial sport activities and the university system only play a minor role. The divergences found in their elite sport systems are mainly related to the way of thinking, roles of different organizations, and relations between the administrators and athletes (Andersen & Ronglan, 2012, p. 18). In Denmark, the implementation of reforms started in the late 1970s, leading to the creation of the Elite Sport Law and the elite sport performance center “Dantop” in 1984. Politicians played a predominant role in these changes and lobbied to make elite sport part of the welfare state system (Andersen & Ronglan, 2012, p. 20). In Norway, the sport movement and the NOC were the initiators of the reforms which resulted in the creation of the country’s elite sport institute “Olympiaton” (Andersen & Ronglan, 2012, p. 20). The government’s role in Norway was much smaller than that of Denmark. In Sweden and Finland, the development of elite sport is the apanage of the NSFs. Sport governance systems actually differ from a country to another (Miege, 2011). Miege (2011, pp. 65–66) has undertaken comparative studies between several countries concerning the governmental body in charge of sport, the law on sport, the strength of state intervention, and the sport movement organization in charge of the national federations’ activities (see Table 2.3a and 2.3b): For Zheng et al. (2019), a national sport system is very complex. A sport policy is not elaborated by a single organization as it results from the collaboration of different national bodies. An optimal coordination between these organizations in a country will lead to success in elite sport. Zheng et al. believe that this synchronization must also take place between the national and regional bodies. But taking China as an example, they define the elite sport system in the following pyramid (see Fig. 2.1):

56

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

Table 2.3a Interpretation of Miege’s (2011, pp. 65–66) survey on sports organizations in the western member-states of the European Union (EU) Countries

Governmental Body in Charge

Germany

Federal Ministry of Home Affairs

Austria

Belgium

Spain

France

Greece

Governmental Law on Sport

No federal state law on sport. Competence attribute to regional states Federal Chancery Federal law on and State Secretary sport promotion. Each regional state has passed a law on sport Three linguistic A law on sport communities existed since 1963. In 1980, this law attributed competence to the communities Ministry of Mentioned in the Education Spanish constitution. The law on sport was voted in 1990 Ministry of Sports Law of 1984 on the organization and promotion of physical and sporting activities Ministry of Culture Mentioned in the Greek constitution. The law on sport was voted in 1995

State Intervention

NOC or Confederation

Weak

Confederation

Weak

Confederation

Weak

NOC

Strong

Sports Council and NOC

Strong

NOC

Strong

NOC

For Zheng et al. (2019), the Chinese elite sport policy starts with the extracurricular sport teams, and is followed in the next level by the provincial academies from which will be selected the most talented athletes who will constitute the provincial teams, national teams, and the pinnacle, which are the Olympic teams. The Chinese sport system is characterized by a very strong state intervention, with the NSFs controlled by the government and the provincial sports organizations by the provincial governments. Provincial teams compete in the Chinese National Games

2

LITERATURE REVIEW ON THE ANALYSIS OF THE FACTORS …

57

Table 2.3b Interpretation of Miege’s (2011, pp. 65–66) survey on sports organizations in the Western member- States of the EU Countries

Governmental Body in Charge

Governmental Law on State Sport Intervention

NOC or Confederation

Ireland

Ministry of Education Prime Minister and other ministers

No law on sport

Weak

NOC

Fundamental law on sport in 1942 which saw the creation of the Italian National Olympic Committee (CONI) 1976 law on physical education and sports (completed by the 1988 law) Law on Welfare

Weak. The CONI is highly autonomous

NOC

Strong

NOC

Weak

Confederation and NOC

Italy

Luxembourg

Netherlands

Portugal

GB

Ministry of Physical Education and Sports Ministry of Public Health, Welfare, and Sports Prime Minister and State Secretary for Sport Ministry of Culture, Medias, and Sport

Mentioned in the Strong 1976 constitution. The law on sport was signed in 1990 No law on sport Weak

Confederation and NOC

Sport councils (for England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland)

(CNG), which occur every four years. The will to succeed in these national games pushed the provinces to prioritize this competition at the expense of the implementation of a program leading to China’s success in the Olympics. To compensate for this issue, medals won in the Olympics by athletes originating from a province were added to the CNG’s medal table, with an Olympic medal being equal to two CNG’s medals. A world record in the Olympics was also worth a CNG gold medal. Such strategies implemented by the Chinese government were aimed at coordinating the actions between national and regional policies, leading to solidify the country’s elite sport success.

58

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

Full-time teams: Olympic squad, national, and provincial teams

Sports schools: Provincial Sports Academies or Reserve Teams

Extra-Curricular Sports Schools

Fig. 2.1 Interpretation of the Chinese elite sport system defined by Zheng et al. (2019)

For Zheng et al. (2019), the coordination of national and regional policies is rendered efficient by the following points: First, the implementation of a single powerful national organization capable of attracting regional organizations; second, the clarification of roles between the national and regional organizations; third, the establishment of a mutual assistance between the national and regional organizations; and fourth, the involvement of both the national and regional organizations in the leveraging of national competition. The identification of a holistic framework of analysis of elite sport policy has started in 2003 with the creation of the Sport Policies Leading to International Sport Success (SPLISS) network. Created in 2003 and led by Veerle De Bosccher, this group developed and shared expertise in elite sport policy in cooperation with policymakers, NOCs, international sport organizations, and researchers worldwide (De Bosccher et al., 2015, p. 16). SPLISS delivered its first results in 2008 and the second in

2

LITERATURE REVIEW ON THE ANALYSIS OF THE FACTORS …

59

2015. In 2008, six countries were analyzed: Belgium (which data were divided between the regions of Flanders and Wallonia), Canada, Italy, the Netherlands, and GB. In 2015, 15 countries were analyzed: Belgium (Wallonia and Flanders), Canada, the Netherlands, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Northern Ireland (as part of GB), Portugal, Spain, Switzerland, South Korea, Japan, Australia, and Brazil. That year witnessed the participation of researchers and policymakers from 15 countries. According to Henry et al. (2020), the SPLISS approach remains the most used method to compare elite sport policies between countries to this day. The SPLISS model is based on nine pillars of elite sport success, which are divided into three phases: Input, Throughput, and Output (De Bosscher et al., 2015, p. 8; p. 42). The input phase consists of the first pillar, financial support. The second or throughput phase consists of the eight other pillars: (1) Governance, organization, and structure of elite sport policies; (2) Participation in sport; (3) Talent identification and development system; (4) Athletic and post-career support; (5) Training facilities; (6) Coaching and coach development; (7) (Inter)national competition; and (8) Scientific research. The third and last phase, the output, is concerned with the degree to which an organization has achieved its goal. In the case of the Olympics, output is related to the success or failure to win medals. De Bosscher et al., (2015, p. 354) have found that the pillars that mostly correlate with success, in both Summer and Winter Olympics, are pillar 1 (financial support), pillar 2 (organization and structure of sport policies), pillar 7 (coaching provision and coach development), and pillar 9 (scientific research). Financial support is the most important factor, having a 0.9 correlation with the Summer and Winter Sports market share between 2009 and 2012. According to De Bosscher et al., (2015, p. 47), establishing a successful elite sport policy goes beyond the output of winning medals. It is a virtuous circle shaped by the outcome looked for by countries, which is motivated by a national agenda targeting national pride, international prestige, good feeling, and public interest in sport. Despite being the reference in the analysis of elite sport policy, Henry et al. (2020) believe the SPLISS methodology has the following limitations. Although it gives great importance for the economic and political factors, it does not consider them in their calculation. Details are also missing in the throughput. For example, Pillar 7, coaching provision and development, does not consider how coaches’ skills are used to generate

60

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

success. This lack of explanation is also seen in Pillar 9, scientific research, where it also fails to show how funding in sports science is systematized. In addition, using one model for all countries does not consider the objective of each nation in respect to their prioritization of the different sports. Since the outcome is measured by winning medals, it also could not analyze the policies implemented by countries that have never won any medal. In both their 2008 and 2015 research, all the countries chosen are economically developed. Developing nations are, therefore, left aside. Finally, it does not consider the actions of individuals at a micro-level. Reiche has used a different approach than the SPLISS methodology. Instead of using a detailed model, he identified four variables he considers the most relevant for a country’s success in elite sport. They constitute what he called the WISE formula (Reiche, 2016, pp. 3–4). First, the promotion of women (W) in sport, as developing women elite sport will strongly enhance the potential of a country to win medals (Reiche, 2016, p. 90). Second, institutionalization (I) of the promotion of Olympic sports since setting up a centralized governmental sport system offering the proper structure for athletes to develop their skills is crucial to obtain results (Reiche, 2016, p.97). Third, specialization (S) in medal-promising sports as focusing on sports that offer higher chances of winning medals is a very commonly used method for countries to achieve success (Reiche, 2016, p. 108). Fourth, early (E) learning in sports newly added to the Olympic program, which will give countries opting for this strategy an advance over their rivals (Reiche, 2016, p. 126). Reiche’s idea of a successful elite sport policy is very much based on the countries’ prioritization of sports where achieving success is relatively easier due to a lower level of competition. De Bosscher et al. (2019) have also analyzed the effectiveness of prioritization in elite sport. They found that countries with low elite sport budgets usually prioritize a small number of sports. These countries are usually less successful that those that fund a higher number of sports. After looking at the different concepts related to the establishment of elite sport policies, we will now address the micro-level factors leading to performance in elite sport. The latter concern the actions of the athletes and the staff in charge of them.

2

LITERATURE REVIEW ON THE ANALYSIS OF THE FACTORS …

2.4

61

Micro-Level Factors

For De Bosscher (2008, p. 20), the micro-level factors concern the “athletes’ close environment: Parents, partner, and coach”. Sotiriadou and De Bosscher (2018) highlighted the fact that since the mid-1980s, the elite athletes’ environment was no longer limited to the coach that teaches them the techniques of their sport. The team around them involved experts in different fields such as physiotherapy, sports medicine, sports psychology, exercise physiology, biomechanics, sports analysis, life coaching, and strength and conditioning. Due to the variety of these academic disciplines, finding a micro-level uniform model that will lead to success related to elite sport performance is impossible to find in the literature. To demonstrate this field’s diversity, we will give an account on different journals related to the sciences used in the athletes’ direct environments. This list was taken from the “SCImago Journal & Country Rank” website (scimago, 2020), which is a publicly available portal that includes the journals and country scientific indicators developed from the information contained in “Scopus”, a database website gathering a multitude of papers that have been accepted for publication. We have taken from this list journals that are ranked in the “sports science” category with a of their scope involving sport performance: • “Sports Medicine”, which includes topics such as performance research, injuries preventions, treatments, and the application of physiological and biomechanical principles in sport. • The “International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance”, which aims to advance the knowledge of “sport and exercise physiologists, sport performance researchers, and other scientists”. • The “Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research” which mission is “to advance the knowledge about strength and conditioning through research”. • “Psychology of Sport and Exercise”, which is “an international forum for scholarly reports in the psychology of sport and exercise”. • “Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism”, which focuses “on the application of physiology, nutrition, and metabolism to the study of human health, physical activity, and fitness”. • The “Journal of Biomechanics”, which uses “the principles of mechanics to explore biological problems”. Part of the topics include the mechanical analysis of sports performance.

62

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

• The “International Journal of Performance analysis in sport”, which studies focus on the “nature of sport performance, tactics used, and factors influencing performance”. Other topics include the “design of analysis systems, sports equipment, research into training, and modeling and predicting performance”. • The “International Journal of Sports Science and Coaching”, which “aims to bridge the gap between coaching and sports science”. Its purpose is to make sports science accessible to coaches and ensure that “the challenges faced by coaches are communicated to sports scientists”. “Scientific research is embraced in the quest to uncover, understand, and develop the processes involved in sports coaching and elite performance”. The factors leading to performance at a micro-level are distinct and numerous. Individual performance in sport is actually characterized by four factors (Serrano et al., 2013): Physical, psychological, technical, and tactical. If sports medicine, biomechanics, physiology, nutrition, sports psychology, or strength and conditioning are related to the physical and psychological factors, the technical and tactical factors are related to the specific demands of each sport. What adds to the complexity of the performance is the existence of a large number of sports all having different set of rules (Nassif, 2018), which will make it impossible for a country to create one general model it could apply at a micro-level. For leading scholars in elite sport policies such as De Bosscher, Sotiriadou, and Henry, countries’ performances must include macro-, meso-, and micro-level variables. They must not be separated. Countries around the world have different political, economic, demographic, geographic, and cultural backgrounds which will systematically shape the meso-level policies to be implemented. The variety of applied sciences and sports rules at a micro-level will never allow the elaboration of one detailed model that will determine how countries’ performances in elite sport are achieved. For Sotiriadou and De Bosscher (2018), the future of the sub-academic field of elite sport policy must go through the coordination of research in sport management and applied sciences (physiology, biomechanics, psychology, medicine…). After going through the literature review, the next chapter will encompass a correlation study between the WRCES and the macro-, meso-, and micro-level factors identified by the scholars whose research projects have

2

LITERATURE REVIEW ON THE ANALYSIS OF THE FACTORS …

63

been covered in this book. These calculi will lay the foundation of the framework that we intend to propose, which will be the outcome of our work.

References Adami, S. (2004). Les Jeux méditerranéens. Confluences Méditerranée, 3, 21–30. Andersen, S. S., & Ronglan, L. T. (Eds.). (2012). Nordic elite sport: Same ambitions, different tracks. Copenhagen Business School Press DK. Anderson, C. J., Arrondel, L., Blais, A., Daoust, J. F., Laslier, J. F., & Van der Straeten, K. (2020). Messi, Ronaldo, and the politics of celebrity elections: Voting for the best soccer player in the world. Perspectives on Politics, 18(1), 91–110. Andreff, W. (2013). Economic development as major determinant of Olympic medal wins: Predicting performances of Russian and Chinese teams at Sochi Games. International Journal of Economic Policy in Emerging Economies, 6(4), 314–340. Balandier, G. (1967). Sociologie, ethnologie et ethnographie. In G. Gurvitch (Ed.), Traité de sociologie (pp. 99–113). Presses Universitaires de France, tome 1. Benedict, R., & Weill, R. (1950). Echantillons de civilisations. Gallimard. Bergsgard, N. A., Houlihan, B., Mangset, P., Nødland, S. I., & Rommetvedt, H. (2009). Sport policy. Routledge. Bernard, A. B., & Busse, M. R. (2004). Who wins the Olympic Games: Economic resources and medal totals. Review of Economics and Statistics, 86(1), 413–417. Bian, X. (2005). Predicting Olympic medal counts: The effects of economic development on Olympic performance. The Park Place Economist, 13(1), 37– 44. Bouchet, P., & Kaach, M. (2004). Existe-t-il un «modèle sportif» dans les pays africains francophones? Staps, 3, 7–26. Bourdieu, P. (1979). La Distinction, critique sociale du jugement Minuit. Bourdieu, P. (1980). Questions de sociologie. Indexed by Google. Minuit. Brohm, J. M. (1976). Critiques du sport. C. Bourgois. Callède, J. P. (2002). Les politiques du sport en France. L’année Sociologique, 52(2), 437–457. Chappell, R. (2005). Sport in Namibia: Conflicts, negotiations and struggles since independence. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 40(2), 241–254. Chehabi, H. E. (1995). Sport and politics in Iran: The legend of Gholamreza Takhti. The International Journal of the History of Sport, 12(3), 48–60. Collins, M. F., & Buller, J. R. (2003). Social exclusion from high-performance sport: Are all talented young sports people being given an equal opportunity

64

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

of reaching the Olympic Podium? Journal of Sports and Social Issues, 27 (4), 420–442. Colomb, P. (1992). Sport et Etat. Pouvoirs, No, 61, 39–51. De Bosscher, V. (2008). The global sporting arms race: An international comparative study on sports policy factors leading to international sporting success. Meyer & Meyer Verlag. De Bosscher, V., Shibli, S., & Weber, A. C. (2019). Is prioritisation of funding in elite sport effective? An analysis of the investment strategies in 16 countries. European Sport Management Quarterly, 19(2), 221–243. 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. Meyer & Meyer Sport. De Rycke, J., & De Bosscher, V. (2019). Mapping the potential societal impacts triggered by elite sport: A conceptual framework. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 11(3), 485–502. Den Butter, F. A., & Van Der Tak, C. M. (1995). Olympic medals as an indicator of social welfare. Social Indicators Research, 35(1), 27–37. Durand-Busch, N., Salmela, J. H., & Thompson, K. A. (2004). Le role joué par les parents dans le développement et le maintien de la performance athlétique expert. Staps Revue International Des Sciences Du Sport Et De L’éducation Physique, No, 64, 15–38. Emrich, E., Klein, M., Pitsch, W., & Pierdzioch, C. (2012). On the determinants of sporting success—A note on the Olympic Games. Economics Bulletin, 32(3), 1890–1901. Forté, L. (2006). Fondements sociaux de l’engagement sportif chez les jeunes athlètes de haut niveau. Science & Motricité, 3(59), 55–67. Forté, L., & Mennesson, C. (2012). Réussite athlétique et heritage sportif. Socialisation familiale et développement d’un capital sportif de haut niveau. SociologieS, http://journals.openedition.org/sociologies/4082; https://doi. org/10.4000/sociologies.4082. Galily, Y. (2003). Playing hoops in Palestine: The early development of basketball in the land of Israel, 1935–56. The International Journal of the History of Sport, 20(1), 143–151. 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. Routledge. Green, M., & Oakley, B. (2001). Elite sport development systems and playing to win: Uniformity and diversity in international approaches. Leisure Studies, 20(4), 247–267.

2

LITERATURE REVIEW ON THE ANALYSIS OF THE FACTORS …

65

Grix, J., & Carmichael, F. (2012). Why do governments invest in elite sport? A polemic. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 4(1), 73–90. Guttman, A. (1978). From record to ritual: The nature of modern sport. Columbia University Press. Henry, I. P., Amara, M., et al-Tauqi, M. (2003). Sport, Arab nationalism and the Pan-Arab games. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 38(3), 295–310. Henry, I., Dowling, M., Ko, L. M., & Brown, P. (2020). Challenging the new orthodoxy: A critique of SPLISS and variable-oriented approaches to comparing sporting nations. European Sport Management Quarterly, 20(4), 520–536. Hong, E. (2012). Applying a Western-based policy community framework to the analysis of South Korean elite sport policy: The role of businesses and armed forces. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 4(1), 23–37. Houlihan, B., & Zheng, J. (2015). Small states: Sport and politics at the margin. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 7 (3), 329–344. Johnson, D. K., & Ali, A. (2000). Coming to play or coming to win: Participation and success at the Olympic Games (Wellesley College Department of Economics Working Paper, 2000–10). Kardiner, A. (1969). L’individu dans sa societe (The Individual and His Society, 1939). Gallimard. Keech, M., & Nauright, J. (2014). Sports industry and policy in the United Kingdom. Kirk, D., & MacPhail, A. (2003). Social positioning and the construction of a youth sports club. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 38(1), 23–44. Kiviaho, P., & Mäkelä, P. (1978). Olympic success: A sum of non-material and material factors. International Review of Sport Sociology, 13(2), 5–22. Kuper, G. H., & Sterken, E. (2001). Olympic participation and performance since 1896. Available at SSRN 274295. Lever, J. (1983). Soccer madness. The University of Chicago Press. Levine, P. (1986). A.G. Spalding and the rise of baseball: The promise of American sport. Oxford University Press. Lezama, E., Pak, L., Yang, R. X., & Yu, S. (2015). Strategies for improving Brazilian public diplomacy with the 2016 Summer Olympics. The George Washington University, Elliott School of International Affairs, Capstone Paper. Disponible en: academia. edu. Lui, H. K., & Suen, W. (2008). Men, money, and medals: An econometric analysis of the Olympic Games. Pacific Economic Review, 13(1), 1–16. McClelland, D. C., & Mac Clelland, D. C. (1961). Achieving society (Vol. 92051). Simon and Schuster.

66

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

Miege C. in the book written by Sobry, C. (Ed.). (2011). Sports governance in the world: a socio-historic approach; the organization of sport in Europe: A patch-work of institutions, with few shared points. Le Manuscrit (ed.). Moosa, I. A., & Smith, L. (2004). Economic development indicators as determinants of medal winning at the Sydney Olympics: An extreme bounds analysis. Australian Economic Papers, 43(3), 288–301. Nassif, N. (2018). World ranking of countries in elite sport. Rivista Di Diritto Ed Economia Dello Sport, 14(2), 55–75. Novikov, A. D., & Maximenko, A. M. (1972). The influence of selected socioeconomic factors on the level of sports achievements in the various countries: (using as an example the 18th Olympic games in Tokyo). International Review of Sport Sociology, 7 (1), 27–44. Nye, J. S. (2008). The powers to lead. Nye, J. S. (2011). The future of power. Public Affairs. Official website of Nanyang Technological University of Singapore. https://nbs. ntu.edu.sg/Research/ResearchCentres/CEM/Research/Documents/SPI% 20Report%202019.pdf. Retrieved in April 2020. Official website of the international brand valuation and strategy consultancy “Brand Finance”, https://brandfinance.com/. Retrieved in January 2022. Official website of the media company Reuters, https://www.reuters.com/art icle/us-olympics-2018-alps-bolivia/bolivias-alpine-skier-overcomes-mounta ins-of-a-different-kind-idUSKBN1F11L0. Retrieved in May 2020. Official website of the portal “Scimago”. http://www.scimagojr.com/aboutu s.php. Retrieved in May 2020 Official website of the Softpower30 index, https://softpower30.com/. Retrieved in April 2020. Official website of United Kingdom Sport (UK Sport). https://www.sportdeve lopment.org.uk/index.php/subjects/48-policy/844-sport-raising-the-game. Retrieved in May 2020. Pfau, W. D. (2006). Predicting the medal wins by country at the 2006 winter Olympic games: An econometrics approach. Korean Economic Review, 22(2), 233–247. Pociello, C. (1981). « La force, l’énergie, la grâce et les réflexes ». Le jeu complexe des dispositions culturelles et sportives (pp. 171–237). In C. Pociello (ed.), Sports et société. Approche socio-culturelle des pratiques. Vigot. Pociello, C. (1983). Le rugby ou la guerre des styles. Editions A. M. Métailié. Rathke, A., & Woitek, U. (2008). Economics and the summer Olympics: An efficiency analysis. Journal of Sports Economics, 9(5), 520–537. Reiche, D. (2015). Investing in sporting success as a domestic and foreign policy tool: The case of Qatar. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 7 (4), 489–504.

2

LITERATURE REVIEW ON THE ANALYSIS OF THE FACTORS …

67

Reiche, D. (2016). Success and failure of countries at the Olympic Games. Routledge. Reiche, D. (2018). Issues around the FIFA World Cup 2018 in Russia: A showcase of how sports and politics mix. Sport Und Gesellschaft, 15(2–3), 283–296. Riesman, D., & Denney, R. (1951). Football in America: A study in culture diffusion. American Quarterly, 3(4), 309–325. Riordan, J. (1993). Rewriting soviet sports history. Journal of Sport History, 20(3), 247–258. Serrano, J., Shahidian, S., Sampaio, J., & Leite, N. (2013). The importance of sports performance factors and training contents from the perspective of futsal coaches. Journal of Human Kinetics, 38, 151. Sotiriadou, K. P., & Shilbury, D. (2009). Australian elite athlete development: An organisational perspective. Sport Management Review, 12(3), 137–148. Sotiriadou, P., & De Bosscher, V. (2018). Managing high-performance sport: Introduction to past, present and future considerations. European Sport Management Quarterly, 18(1), 1–7. Tcha, M., & Pershin, V. (2003). Reconsidering performance at the Summer Olympics and revealed comparative advantage. Journal of Sports Economics, 4(3), 216–239. Thomas, R. (1993). Sociologie du sport. Presses Universitaires de France. Tinaz, C. Turkish Sport: Lost in Politics?, chapter in the book written by Reiche, D. R., & Sorek, T. (Eds.). (2019). Sport, politics and society in the Middle East. Oxford University. Van Tuyckom, C., & Jöreskog, K. G. (2012). C. Van Tuyckom, & K. Jöreskog,“Going for gold! Welfare characteristics and Olympic success: An application of the structural equation approach.” Quality & Quantity (in press). Quality & Quantity, 46(1), 189–205. Waser, A. M. (1989). Le marché des partenaires. Actes De La Recherche En Sciences Sociales, 80(1), 2–21. Zheng, J., Lau, P. W. C., Chen, S., Dickson, G., De Bosscher, V., & Peng, Q. (2019). Interorganisational conflict between national and provincial sport organisations within China’s elite sport system: Perspectives from national organisations. Sport Management Review, 22(5), 667–681.

CHAPTER 3

Correlations Between Sport Results, Population, GDP, Area, and Research Rankings

Abstract Correlations between the 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 editions of the WRCES were made with the population, GDP, GDP per capita, area, population density, and research output rankings of the same countries for the six corresponding years. These correlations calculi have showed that GDP and research output have the strongest impact on countries’ results in elite sport. Meanwhile, population and GDP per capita, often highlighted by some scholars and mainstream media, actually have a minor impact. Keywords Correlations · Sport · Population · GDP · Research

3.1

Introduction

This chapter aims at identifying the general factors that will lead to successful policies in any given country. Given that all the research conducted in this field has so far only considered medals as a measurement of success, many countries could not have been analyzed, so the scope of comparison was systematically reduced. With the WRCES, which methodology has been explained in Chapter 1, we were able to evaluate all the countries’ performances in all the recognized sports and attribute © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 N. Nassif and M. Raspaud, National Success in Elite Sport, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38997-9_3

69

70

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

a weight according to the level of competition in each sport. The six editions of the WRCES, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 have resulted in the ranking of all the NOCs with the total amount of points collected each year. To identify the factors leading to a country’s success in elite sport, we will measure the correlations between the WRCES results in these six editions with the population, GDP, GDP per capita, area, population density, and research output rankings of the same countries for the six corresponding years. This comparative study was undertaken for the following reasons: – Population, GDP, GDP per capita, area, and density rankings will show the impact of demography, wealth, and geography which were three of the macro-level factors identified by researchers in the field. The information for these rankings were taken from the United Nations Statistics Divisions (United Nations Statistics Divisions, 2021). The comparisons will be carried out between the points won by each country in the WRCES and the number of inhabitants for the population, the total amount of US dollars (in millions) for the GDP, the total amount of US dollars for the GDP per capita, the total amount of square kilometers (km2) for the area, and the total amount of inhabitants per km2 for the population density. – Although the political and cultural factors were advocated by different scholars, with many of them extolling the political factors’ importance, there will be no comparative study between sport performance and any indicator related to cultural, hard, or soft political power because they are related to a will or decision taken to succeed in sport, not resources like wealth, population, and geography that could have a direct impact on the countries’ performances. – Research output ranking will be examined because we consider that the establishment and optimization of meso- and microfactors cannot be achieved without an extensive knowledge in political science, public administration, sports management, engineering (Avagnale et al., 2019), architecture (Flowers, 2017), sports medicine, sports physiology, sports psychology, biomechanics, nutrition, coaching, performance analysis, and strength and conditioning. – Indeed, by looking at the website of the International Council of Sport Science and Physical Education (International Council of

3

CORRELATIONS BETWEEN SPORT RESULTS, POPULATION …

71

Sport Science and Physical Education, 2020), organization recognized by the IOC gathering sports scholars from around the world, we will also find that several other academic disciplines are involved: Education, philosophy, history, and sociology. – All the subjects mentioned touch on the different main academic fields categorized by the “Academic Ranking of World Universities”, commonly known as the “Shangai Ranking”: Natural sciences, engineering, life sciences, medical sciences, and social sciences. We will, therefore, identify whether a country’s general level of knowledge has an impact on its sport results. The research output country’s ranking will be taken from the “SCImago Journal & Country Rank” website (Scimago, 2022). The comparison will be performed between the points won in the WRCES and the number of publications of each country. By doing these correlations calculi, we will see how much impact the different macro-, meso-, and micro-factors have on a country’s performance in elite sport. Although the political and cultural factors will not be considered in these calculi, we believe that the results obtained will indirectly show the degree of their importance. The model we used to reach these correlations is Pearson’s, which is characterized by three types (statstutor, 2020): – Positive correlation, when one variable increases the other has a tendency to increase. – Negative correlation, when one variable increases the other has a tendency to decrease. – No correlation, when one variable increases the other does not tend to either increase or decrease. The strength of a correlation is designed as follows: – Positive values mean positive correlation with 1 being the perfect correlation. – Negative values mean a negative correlation with -1 being the perfect correlation. – 0 means no correlation.

72

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

Whether positive or negative, the strength of a correlation is considered as follows: – – – – –

0–0.19: very weak 0.2–0.39: weak 0.4–0.59: moderate 0.6–0.79: strong 0.8–1: very strong

Table 3.1 will show the results we obtained: As observed in these results, the correlation between the WRCES and the population ranges between 0.30 and 0.39. It is therefore weak. Media often use the medal per capita ranking to identify the countries that are able to “punch above their weight” (Usnews, 2016; Time, 2016; Stuff, 2016). Less populated countries usually top this ranking and are consequently considered the most efficient in terms of international sport results. This statement seems to be very inaccurate whether we address the Olympic Medal Table or the WRCES. Indeed, in terms of medal collection first, as seen in Chapter 2, several scholars have advocated the low impact of the population on sport results (Bernard & Busse, 2004; Den Butter & Van Der Tak, 1995; De Bosscher, 2008, p. 44; Kuper & Sterken, 2001; Bian, 2005). Bernard and Busse (2004), Den Butter and Van Der Tak (1995), and De Bosscher (2008, p. 44) provide the simplest reason behind that, explaining that no matter how populated countries Table 3.1. Results of the correlations between the WRCES, population, GDP, GDP per capita, area, population density, and research output for the years 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 Years Correlations Correlations Correlations Correlations Correlations WRCES/ WRCES/ WRCES/ WRCES/ WRCES/ Population area Population GDP GDP per density capita

Correlations WRCES/ Research output

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0.82 0.81 0.81 0.79 0.78 0.78

0.39 0.35 0.34 0.30 0.30 0.34

0.78 0.76 0.76 0.75 0.75 0.74

0.23 0.28 0.28 0.29 0.30 0.29

0.64 0.60 0.56 0.56 0.52 0.56

-0.05 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.03 -0.04

3

CORRELATIONS BETWEEN SPORT RESULTS, POPULATION …

73

are, they can only send a limited, often the same number of athletes, in every event. In addition, by correlating the WRCES with the population ranking, we managed to measure the impact of population on sport results in a wider number of countries (206 by opposition to the 94 countries ranked in the Olympic Medal Table). We have even found that for countries with more than 30 million inhabitants, the correlation is even less than 0.2, hence very weak. Correlations above 0.35, which are accordingly close to the moderate correlation of 0.4, are for countries with less than 6 million inhabitants. Consequently, one can conclude that a number close to 6 million inhabitants appears to be large enough to compete with anyone. It is also possible to have a good number of athletes with less inhabitants. Indeed, one of many examples points to Luxembourg, with around 600,000 inhabitants, outperforming Iraq (40 million), Ivory Coast (25 million), Jordan (10 million), Lebanon (6 million), and Kyrgyzstan (6 million) for six consecutive years. The several reasons behind these cases will be further explained in Chapter 4. Even though population plays a minor role, when the number of inhabitants is extremely small (around 100,000 inhabitants and less), chances of success will be compromised. From 2014 to 2019, 70 to 80% of the 20 less populated countries (populated between 10,670 and 110,211) did not finish in the last 20 of the WRCES (2022) but none of them made better than 111th (Bermuda in 2014). The correlation between sport results and GDP ranged between 0.74 and 0.78, demonstrating the importance of wealth which was not contradicted by any scholar cited in the literature review. However, although advocated by Lui and Suen (2008) and Kuper and Sterken (2001), GDP per capita has a weak significance, with a correlation oscillating between 0.23 and 0.30. Henry et al. (2020) explained this by saying that it is not the people’s wealth that determine performance, but the budget consecrated to elite sport. This idea will be further explored in this work. Although understudied in this field of research, a country’s area has a more relevant impact on its performance in elite sport than population and GDP per capita. It has a correlation that ranges between 0.52 (moderate) and 0.64 (strong). Emrich et al. (2012) were the strongest supporters of the area’s importance by arguing that bigger countries have more diversity in their natural environment, thus more opportunities to succeed in a larger number of sports. For Reiche (2016, p. 79), it is mainly the density, which is the division of population by the area, that hinders the place available to practice certain sports like golf. By calculating the

74

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

correlation between density and the WRCES, we have found that it has a very weak negative correlation on the general sport results of a country (between -0.03 and -0.05). This could confirm Reiche’s theory stating that density, and consequently area, only impact a very limited number of sports. The strongest factor resulting from these calculi is the research output which varies from 0.78 (strong) to 0.82 (very strong). This suggests that the scientific advancement of a country is the most determinant variable to succeed in elite sport. Our work aims to provide a deeper analysis of these results in order to study these factors’ interrelation, then develop a general framework. While the relevance of wealth and research output is not subject to debate, the reasons behind the population’s minor importance, although considered a determinant of success by the media, sport authorities, and certain scholars, need to be thoroughly examined. Another factor that must be investigated is GDP per capita. If GDP, which signifies wealth, is a major contributor to performance, why doesn’t GDP per capita, evidence of the inhabitants’ wealth which is advocated by several scholars, have an impact on countries’ results in elite sport? These questions will be discussed in Chapter 4. We believe that finding these answers will pave the way to identify what it takes for countries to succeed in elite sport.

References Avagnale, E., Califano, R., & Fiorillo, I. (2019, September). Experimental comfort assessment of a t-shirt for roadrunner. In International conference of the Italian association of design methods and tools for industrial engineering (pp. 71–81). Springer. Bernard, A. B., & Busse, M. R. (2004). Who wins the Olympic Games: Economic resources and medal totals. Review of Economics and Statistics, 86(1), 413–417. Bian, X. (2005). Predicting Olympic medal counts: The effects of economic development on Olympic performance. The Park Place Economist, 13(1), 37– 44. De Bosscher, V. (2008). The global sporting arms race: An international comparative study on sports policy factors leading to international sporting success. Meyer & Meyer Verlag. Den Butter, F. A., & Van Der Tak, C. M. (1995). Olympic medals as an indicator of social welfare. Social Indicators Research, 35(1), 27–37.

3

CORRELATIONS BETWEEN SPORT RESULTS, POPULATION …

75

Emrich, E., Klein, M., Pitsch, W., & Pierdzioch, C. (2012). On the determinants of sporting success–A note on the Olympic Games. Economics Bulletin, 32(3), 1890–1901. Flowers, B. S. (2017). Sport and architecture. Routledge. Henry, I., Dowling, M., Ko, L. M., & Brown, P. (2020). Challenging the new orthodoxy: A critique of SPLISS and variable-oriented approaches to comparing sporting nations. European Sport Management Quarterly, 20(4), 520–536. Kuper, G. H., & Sterken, E. (2001). Olympic participation and performance since 1896. Available at SSRN 274295. Lui, H. K., & Suen, W. (2008). Men, money, and medals: An econometric analysis of the Olympic Games. Pacific Economic Review, 13(1), 1–16. Official website of the International Council of Sport Science and Physical Education, https://www.icsspe.org/about/structure/associations%E2% 80%99-board. Retrieved in May 2020. Official website of the journal “Usnews”, https://www.usnews.com/news/bestcountries/articles/2016-08-23/countries-with-the-most-olympic-gold-med als-per-capita. Retrieved in 2016. Official website of the journal “Usnews”, https://www.usnews.com/news/bestcountries/articles/2016-08-23/countries-with-the-most-olympic-gold-med als-per-capita. Retrieved in May 2020. Official website of the portal “Scimago”, http://www.scimagojr.com/aboutus. php. Retrieved in January 2022. Official website of the “Stuff” newspapers, http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/oly mpics/83425883/rio-olympics-2016-new-zealand-finishes-fourth-in-finalmedals-per-capita-standings. Retrieved in 2016. Official website of the “Stuff” newspapers, http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/oly mpics/83425883/rio-olympics-2016-new-zealand-finishes-fourth-in-finalmedals-per-capita-standings. Retrieved in May 2020. Official website of the “Time” magazine, http://time.com/4452128/olympicsmedals-per-capita-rankings/. Retrieved in 2016. Official website of the “Time” magazine, http://time.com/4452128/olympicsmedals-per-capita-rankings/. Retrieved in May 2020. Official website of the United Nations, https://unstats.un.org/home/. Retrieved in May 2020. Official website of the United Nations, https://unstats.un.org/home/. Retrieved in 2021. Official website of the World Ranking of Countries in Elite Sport, www.worlds portranking.info. Retrieved in January 2022. Reiche, D. (2016). Success and failure of countries at the Olympic Games. Routledge. The website of the statistics support for students « statstutor », http://www.sta tstutor.ac.uk/resources/uploaded/pearsons.pdf. Retrieved in May 2020.

CHAPTER 4

Why Do Population and GDP Per Capita not Have an Impact on Countries’ Performances in Elite Sport?

Abstract Without wealth and scientific advancement, a large number of inhabitants will count for nothing. Other factors undermining the importance of population are geography, mainly in winter sports, and genetics, explained in this book by the countries’ average weight and height, both decisive components in combat and strength-related sports. The impact of both population and GDP per capita is also reduced by the development of a national sport culture, which will increase mass participation independently of the number of inhabitants or wealth per capita, and offer the potential to extract a pool of talented athletes. The importance of GDP per capita and population is also reduced by the governments’ political interest to succeed in international competitions. Keywords Population · GDP per Capita · Limited · Impact · Sport

4.1

Introduction

This chapter is a direct follow-up to the results obtained in Chapter 3. We will first go through all the variables limiting the importance of population, the most overrated macro-factor advocated by researchers by far, media and sport administrators, to explain the reason behind a country’ © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 N. Nassif and M. Raspaud, National Success in Elite Sport, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38997-9_4

77

78

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

success in sport. We will then perform an analysis on why GDP per capita has a weak incidence on countries’ results in elite sport, especially considering that GDP has a strong one. The identification of the components that hinder the impact of both population and GDP per capita will be the base of the model that explains countries’ performances in international competitions, which is the objective of this book. The first variable limiting the impact of population is actually another factor that has a high correlation on sport results, which is wealth. Indeed, as stated by De Bosscher et al., (2015, p. 24), since the financial support is the first link of the performance chain, an economically wealthy country will have a higher capacity to provide the resources needed to succeed. This factor is strongly diminishing the population’s importance. We compared the GDP of six of the twenty most populated countries (Pakistan, Bangladesh, Philippines, Ethiopia, Vietnam, and the Congo Democratic Republic) that have more than 75 million inhabitants each with six countries that have less than 12 million inhabitants each (Belgium, Sweden, Austria, Switzerland, Denmark, and Norway) for 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019. Although much less populated than Pakistan, Bangladesh, Philippines, Ethiopia, Vietnam, and the Congo Democratic Republic (CDR), Belgium, Sweden, Austria, Switzerland, Denmark, and Norway have higher GDPs. These six small countries were always better ranked than the large ones in the WRCES. If we take the 20 most populated countries, ten of them (Pakistan, Nigeria, Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Philippines, Egypt, Vietnam, Congo DR, Iran, and Thailand), i.e. 50%, are not among the 20 wealthiest countries. The best positions Bangladesh and Ethiopia obtained in the six editions of the WRCES are 128th. Congo DR never achieved better than 114th. Pakistan, Nigeria, and Vietnam never made it the top 70, and the Philippines was only ranked once in the top 50. Egypt made the top 40 only once and the best place Iran has obtained is 39th. Among these countries, only Thailand made it once to the top 30 of the six editions of the WRCES from 2014 to 2019 (WRCES, 2020). Only seven (China, USA, Brazil, Russia, Mexico, Japan, and Germany) of the 20 most populated countries (35%) were ranked at least once in the WRCES’ best 20. All these seven countries belong to the 20 wealthiest, a fact that further weakens the importance of population. If we take the 20 wealthiest countries, ten of them (GB, France, Italy, Canada, South Korea, Spain, Australia, the Netherlands, Saudi Arabia, and Switzerland), i.e. 50%, are not in the 20 most populated countries.

4

WHY DO POPULATION AND GDP PER CAPITA NOT HAVE …

79

Among these countries, only Saudi Arabia did not make it to the WRCES top 30. Switzerland missed the top 30 only in 2014. The Netherlands and Canada were always ranked in the top 20. Spain, South Korea, and Italy always made it to the top 15. Australia was always ranked in the top 10. In addition, GB was ranked 7th in 2014, 3rd in 2015, 3rd in 2016, 5th in 2017, 2nd in 2018, and 3rd in 2019. France always made it to the top 5 and finished twice as runner-up (2016 and 2019). 15 of the 20 wealthiest countries (75%) finished in the WRCES’ best 20. These examples show that without wealth, a population’s size has no impact on sport performance. We have made the same kind of comparisons between sport results and research output, which has a high correlation on sport results, to study whether the effect of population is hindered by scientific knowledge. Although less populated, Belgium, Sweden, Austria, Switzerland, Denmark, and Norway had more publications than Pakistan, Bangladesh, Philippines, Ethiopia, Vietnam, and CDR. As shown above, this translated into outperforming them in sport. Indeed, if we take the 20 most populated countries, 11 of them (Indonesia, Pakistan, Nigeria, Bangladesh, Mexico, Ethiopia, Philippines, Egypt, Vietnam, Congo DR, and Thailand), i.e. 55%, were never ranked in the top 20 in terms of research output. We talked above about the WRCES’ positions of Pakistan, Nigeria, Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Philippines, Egypt, Vietnam, CDR, and Thailand. The two others are Mexico and Indonesia. Mexico was ranked 14th in 2014, 18th in 2015, 18th in 2016, 21st in 2017, 21st in 2018, and 22nd in 2019. Mexico’s good results do not actually show that population has an impact on sport results. The first reason is that Mexico is one of the 20 wealthiest countries, while the second is that Mexico was always in the top 30 in terms of research output, which is an important achievement in scientific advancement. Concerning Indonesia, it never made the top 50 in the WRCES between 2014 and 2019 (WRCES, 2020) although it belongs to the 20 wealthiest countries in the world. However, it was lagging behind in terms of research output. In 2014, Indonesia was ranked 50th in the total amount of publications. In 2019, it moved to the 24th position. Its results in sport did not, however, generally improve: 64th in 2014, 58th in 2015, 51st in 2016, 54th in 2017, 53rd in 2018, and 57th in 2019. The case of Indonesia must be explored in the years to come: either its development in scientific research will yield sport results on the long run, or other factors are limiting its performance.

80

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

Among seven (China, USA, Brazil, Russia, Mexico, Japan, and Germany) of the 20 most populated countries (35%) that were ranked at least once in the WRCES’ best 20, only Mexico was not in the top 20 in the research output (although it was not far from the best 20), a fact that decreases the importance of population. We also compared the best 20 in the WRCES to the best 20 in research output in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019. Fifteen (75%) were ranked in both in 2014, 2017, 2018, and 2019, while sixteen (80%) were ranked in both in 2015 and 2016. Ten of these countries (GB, France, Italy, Canada, Australia, Spain, South Korea, the Netherlands, Poland, and Sweden), i.e. 50%, are not in the 20 most populated countries. These examples show that without a relevant amount of scientific research, population will count for nothing. Another factor reducing the importance of population is geography, which has a moderate to strong correlation on sport results. There are actually two variables characterizing geography. First is the climate, highlighted by Emrich et al. (2012), Johnson and Ali (2000), Andreff (2013), and Reiche (2016, p. 78), all of whom agreed on its impact on winter sports. Second comes area, advocated by Emrich et al. (2012) and Reiche (2016, p. 79). We will start by looking at the winter sport results in the WRCES 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 editions. In 2014, only 92 countries managed to be ranked in the winter sports. This number represents 45% of the total number of NOCs. Meanwhile, all the NOCs were present in the summer sports ranking. Among these 92 countries, 80% have snow, and all the top 60 have snow (World Atlas, 2020). Although it is possible for non-snowy countries to appear in winter sports as Andreff (2013) and Reiche (2016, p. 78) have showed, this participation will yield modest results as having snow is indispensable for success. Among the top 20 most populated countries, nine (Indonesia, Nigeria, Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Philippines, Egypt, Vietnam, CDR, and Thailand), i.e. 45%, do not have snow and could, therefore, not gain points from these sports, which consequently affected their final 2014 WRCES ranking. On the other hand, 15 of the best 20 winter sports countries do not belong to the 20 most populated. Five out of the first 10 (50%) are not among the 80 most populated, but have very cold weathers (World Atlas, 2020): Norway has a yearly average temperature of 1.5 degree Celsius (°C), Austria 6.35 °C, Switzerland 5.5 °C, Latvia 5.6 °C, and Finland 1.7 °C.

4

WHY DO POPULATION AND GDP PER CAPITA NOT HAVE …

81

This was confirmed by the 2015 and 2016 WRCES winter sports rankings. In 2015, 84% of the ranked countries had snow, and with the exception of Hong-Kong (36th), the top 56 countries had snow. The results were very similar in 2016, where 82% of the ranked countries had snow with Hong-Kong (38th) being the only non-snowy country among the top 54. Like in 2014, in both 2015 and 2016, 75% countries of the winter sports top 20 did not belong to the 20 most populated countries. In 2017, the number of countries appearing in the WRCES winter sports ranking increased to 95. However, the changes in the ranking were minor. With the exception of Hong-Kong, the top 52 countries had snow and 70% did not belong to the 20 most populated. 50% of the first 10 were also cold countries not among the 80 most populated: Austria, Sweden, Switzerland, Norway, and Finland (WRCES, 2020). In 2018 and 2019, with the growth of NOC’s participation in winter sports, the number of countries appearing in the WRCES winter sports ranking increased significantly. It went from 95 to 125, a raise of 31%. 50% of the NOCs participated in those two years. Among them, the number of non-snowy countries represented 50%, by opposition to the 20% of the previous years. However, the situation did not change in terms of results. Only Hong-Kong appeared in the best 58 in 2018 and the best 56 in 2019. Although the order slightly changed at the top of the ranking, nine countries (Canada, Russia, Sweden, USA, Norway, Germany, Switzerland, Finland, and Austria) remained in the top 10, with South Korea replacing France. In 2019, despite minor changes, those nine countries stayed in the top 10. Geography, characterized here by cold weather, strongly hinders the importance of population in achieving relevant results in winter sports. Indeed, with the absence of snow, largely populated warm countries like Nigeria, Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Vietnam, Egypt, and the CDR will have no impact on sport results. Countries having a cold weather will have access to more sports which will improve their position in the final ranking. Actually, the top twenty countries in the 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 final rankings have all earned points in winter sports (WRCES, 2020). Temperatures strongly reduce the importance of a large population. Actually, the world average temperature is 14.88 °C (“World count”, 2020). Only two countries with an average temperature above 14.88 °C made it to the top 20 of the 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 editions of the WRCES: Australia and Brazil. The other 18 (90%) are

82

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

considered cold countries. Meanwhile, only six of the 20 most populated (30%) made it to the WRCES top 20. To evaluate the importance of the area highlighted by Emrich et al. (2012), we have calculated the snowy countries’ average area in comparison to the non-snowy ones. We have found that the average area of the countries that have snow is more than four times higher than that of the countries that don’t (1,207,866 km2 by opposition to 324,454). Therefore, the incidence that area has on sports performance is not actually related to the area but to the fact that large countries have snow. Eight of the 20 largest countries (40%) are ranked in the 2014, 2015, and 2016 editions of the WRCES. From these eight countries, five (63%) have cold weather. For 2017, 2018, and 2019 (see Table 39), seven of the 20 largest (35%) appear in the WRCES (2020). From these seven, five (71%) are cold countries. Among the 20 largest, CDR, Sudan, Libya, and Chad never made it to the top 100 of the WRCES. Taking into consideration the high number of cold countries in the WRCES top 20 (85 to 90%), we can conclude that the geographic factor is related to the weather rather than the area. The reason why the correlation between the area and the WRCES is not weak (see Chapter 3) relates to the coincidence that the average area of the countries with cold weathers is much larger than that of the warm countries. Another factor that reduces the population’s impact on the achievement of countries’ success in elite sport is genetics. The concept of genetics was very briefly mentioned in the elite sport policy’s literature. Sotiriadou and Shilbury (2009) have stated that genetics are an uncontrollable factor that intervene at a micro-level. We believe that genetics are a natural factor, similar to geography, and therefore, constitute a macrolevel variable. Genetics are basically characterized by the concept of a gene attributed to a human being by heredity. The science of genetics was developed by nineteenth century’s scientist Gregor Johann Mendel (“Mendel museum”, 2020). One of the subfields of human genetics is population genetics founded by Wright, Haldane, and Fisher, which deals with genetic differences between populations (Serviedo et al., 2014), caused by natural selection or genetic drift. The purpose of this book is not to examine the reasons behind genetic differences among different countries, but to observe how this variable is influencing the countries’ performances in sport. One of the characteristics of human genetics is height, which has a large impact on sport performance. How? While there is no research-based

4

WHY DO POPULATION AND GDP PER CAPITA NOT HAVE …

83

evidence that height can improve the psychological, technical, and tactical components, its impact on the physical component is undoubtable. Indeed, the latter is characterized by different physical qualities which, according to Weineck (1992), are five: 1. Strength; the capacity to overcome external resistance with muscular efforts. 2. Speed; the capacity to cover a distance in the shortest amount of time. 3. Endurance; the capacity to do the longest effort possible and resist fatigue. 4. Flexibility; the capacity to have the muscles and joints stretch to the highest amplitude. 5. Coordination; the capacity to quickly adapt to new sport gestures. According to Samaras (2007), advantages for below average height include greater strength to ratio, faster rotational ability, and lower risk of heat exhaustion. On the other hand, height significantly develops absolute strength. It also gives greater weight and reach as well as stronger bones. The correlation between weight and height can be observed by taking the lists of the top ten heavyweight (above 90 kilos) and the top ten straw weight (under 48 kilos) boxers, the lowest category (The Ring Magazine, 2020). The average height of the top ten heavyweights is 196 centimeters while that of the top ten straw weight is 159, a difference of 37 centimeters. Weight categories have been established in boxing because, as in other combat sports (taekwondo, karate, Muay Thai, mixed martial arts…), taller and heavier men would have an advantage in a direct confrontation with smaller and lighter men. How does this affect a country’s performance in sports? And how do genetics limit the importance of a large population? To answer these questions, we referred to the performance of three populated countries in sports where they have a very high interest and success: Thailand (20th most populated country in the world) in Muay Thai, Mexico (10th most populated country in the world) in Boxing, and China (most populated country in the world) in weightlifting. Those three countries have height averages below the worldwide average height, which is 172 cm for men and 158 cm for women (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2009). Thailand has an average height of 170.3 cm for men and

84

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

159 cm for women, Mexico 169 cm for men and 155 cm for women, and China 167.1 cm for men and 155.8 cm for women. The sport of Muay Thai was created in the seventeenth century by the people of Thailand. In the early 1930s, the Thai government officially codified the sport to spread it internationally. Today, Muay Thai is practiced in 130 countries. Being the sport’s creator, Thailand had a technical edge over the other 129 countries. However, the Thai average height penalized them in the heavy weights categories. Table 4.1 will demonstrate the number of Thai fighters in the top 10 of each category in the World Boxing Council (WBC) Muay Thai professional rankings from 2014 to 2019. Due to the low number of women professional Muay Thai fighters, the WBC Muay Thai does not hold a women professional ranking (WBC Muay Thai, 2020). As we can see, in a six years’ scope, Thai fighters constituted between 80 and 100% of the top 10 of the six lower weight categories: under Table 4.1 Number of Thai fighters in the top 10 of the Muay Thai professional rankings in the different weight categories in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 Weight Categories (kg)

Thai/ Top 10 2014

Thai/ Top 10 2015

Thai/ Top 10 2016

Thai/ Top 10 2017

Thai/ Top 10 2018

Thai/ Top 10 2019

Under 47 Under 49 Under 50.8 Under 52.1 Under 53.5 Under 55.3 Under 57.1 Under 58.9 Under 61.2 Under 63.5 Under 66.7 Under 69.8 Under 72.5 Under 76.3 Under 79.4 Under 86.2 Over 90.7

10 10 9 10 8 9 8 10 8 7 5 3 3 3 0 0 0

10 10 9 10 8 9 8 10 8 7 5 3 3 3 0 0 0

10 10 9 10 8 9 8 10 8 7 5 3 3 3 0 0 0

10 10 9 10 8 9 8 10 8 7 5 3 3 3 0 0 0

10 10 10 10 8 10 5 6 3 7 3 1 0 0 0 0 0

10 10 10 10 8 10 10 9 6 7 6 7 6 2 2 1 0

4

WHY DO POPULATION AND GDP PER CAPITA NOT HAVE …

85

47 kg, 49 kg, 50.8 kg, 52.1 kg, 53.5 kg, and 55.3 kg. In the six categories just above (under 57.1 kg, 58.9 kg, 61.2 kg, 63.5 kg, and 66.7 kg), their rate oscillated between 10 and 100%. From the under 72.5 kg to the heavy categories, the percentage ranged between 0 and 60%. Among the fighters weighing above 79 kg, only one fighter made it to the top 10 in one year out of six. The reason behind their absence from the heavy categories is that, considering their average height of 170.3 cm, there are not enough Thai athletes who could compete in these weight categories. In Mexico, boxing is the second most popular sport after football (WRCES, 2022). Until 2020, throughout more than 100 years of history, Mexico has produced over 200 world men boxing champions, second only to the USA (boxrec, 2020). From these 200 athletes, Mexico had only two champions who weighed above 72.5 kg. The Mexicans’ average height, which is 169 cm, is causing the same problem in boxing as that of Thailand in Muay Thai. In 2001, after winning the bid to organize the 2008 Olympic Games, the Chinese government established the “project 119”, aimed at toping the Olympic medal table when the games are organized in its capital, Beijing. One of the targeted sports to succeed in this endeavor was weightlifting (The New York Sun, 2020). Project 119 reached its goal, and weightlifting was among the sports that contributed to this success. China won five gold medals and one silver, topping the weightlifting medal table. However, its results in weightlifting were obtained in the low categories. Indeed, in the men’s events, China won gold medals in the under 56 kg, 62 kg, 69 kg, 85 kg, and a silver in the under 77 kg categories. It did not field any competitor in the under 94 kg, 105 kg, and over 105 kg categories. Weight categories have been established in combat and strengthrelated sports to eliminate the advantages given by an athlete’s size. This allowed countries like Thailand, Mexico, and China to yield successful results in Muay Thai, boxing, and weightlifting low weight categories but penalized them in the heavy ones. Thus, despite being very populated, genetics strongly limited China, Thailand, and Mexico in sports where they are proficient and have a strong urge to succeed. Having a genetic issue will penalize countries in many events of combat and strengthrelated sports, which represent 14% of the Olympic sports and 16% of the sports recognized by GAISF.

86

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

We did not measure the importance of athletes’ sizes in other sports. The lack of weight divisions denied us access to exact data that would precisely demonstrate the impact of strength and weight on sports that are not combat or strength related. However, a football project called “CJeune” gave us an indicator on the importance of weight in football. The “CJeune” is a football youth project initiated by the Ivorian Football Federation and the former coach of ASEC (Association Sportive des Employés de Commerce) Abidjan Jean Marc Guillou. It was presented on April 26, 2018 during a press conference in Cocody, a city near the Ivory Coast capital Abidjan (Abidjan, 2018). This youth project consists of organizing a series of competitions with young people grouped by age and weight categories. For Jean Marc Guillou, the weight categories system is essential to challenge cheating about the age of young players: “If tomorrow there is a competition with a prize, you will have people who will want to win it at all cost. For that, they will not hesitate to cheat by bringing players who are older than the age category. With the weight, they will not be able to cheat”. The “CJeune” project shows that weight, hence the athletes’ size, has an impact on sports such as football, and accordingly all sports with physical confrontation: basketball, rugby, American football, water polo, handball… However, since sport performance is also characterized by psychological, technical, and tactical factors (Serrano, 2013), it is difficult to quantify the importance of the physical factor. This requires microlevel studies involving exercise physiologists and coaches, strengthening the idea advocated by Sotiriadou and De Bosscher (2018) which says that elite sport policy research must involve scholars in sport management and applied sciences. Despite the lack of information on the importance of height in other sports, we performed a comparative analysis between countries with their highest average heights, populations, and WRCES ranks. The information was retrieved from a research done by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (2009) on a sample of 65 countries. To check whether the average height has an impact on sport performance, we have taken 20 countries with the tallest heights and 20 countries with the shortest heights and compared their population with their WRCES rank for the years 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 (Tables 4.2 and 4.3). As we can see in Table 4.2, all the countries that have the world’s highest average heights had a better WRCES position than population

4

WHY DO POPULATION AND GDP PER CAPITA NOT HAVE …

87

Table 4.2 Countries with the higher average heights (men and women included), population, WRCES 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 ranks (the average height did not change significantly between 2009 and 2019. For the population, we took the average of 2014 and 2019) Count

Aver Height (cm)

Pop 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Rank WRCES WRCES WRCES WRCES WRCES WRCES

1- Bosnia Herzegovina 2Montenegro 3Netherlands 4- Denmark 5- Norway 6- Germany 7- Iceland 8-Serbia 9- Lithuania 10- Sweden 11- Finland 12- Czech Republic 13- Austria 14- Croatia 15- Belgium 16- Slovakia 17- Poland 18- Greece 19- Israel 20- Ireland

177.5

135

89

75

76

74

82

83

175.8

168

77

87

82

84

93

90

175.8

68

15

13

15

17

19

15

175.65 175.2 174.5 174.5 174.4 174.4 174.15 173.95 173.76

115 118 17 180 99 142 89 116 84

21 32 3 93 34 52 31 44 23

29 24 6 83 34 30 20 32 22

20 22 4 86 32 36 17 29 19

28 24 2 63 30 44 16 27 20

26 22 5 70 15 40 16 20 28

25 21 9 74 20 53 17 24 19

173.5 173.445 173.35 172.5 171.9 171.5 171.5 171

97 130 79 117 37 87 101 124

30 28 26 40 18 38 55 61

25 37 16 48 19 54 55 44

23 43 30 46 24 53 55 38

26 36 18 43 23 53 50 33

33 23 12 42 29 50 52 30

31 27 11 42 28 39 54 43

rank. The difference between those two scores ranged from eight (Poland in 2018; 37th most populated country and 29th in the WRCES, and Germany in 2019; 17th most populated and 9th in the WRCES) to 117 (Iceland in 2017; 180th in terms of population and 63rd in the WRCES) positions. If we take the results of those 20 countries for six consecutive years, their average WRCES rank was 71 places better than their population rank. The results were very different for countries with the lowest average height as shown in Table 4.3. Only Mongolia, Bahrain, Japan, and Chile

88

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

Table 4.3 Countries with the lowest average heights (men and women included), population, WRCES 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 ranks (the average height did not change significantly between 2009 and 2019. For the population, we took the average of 2014 and 2019) Count

Aver Height (cm)

Pop 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Rank WRCES WRCES WRCES WRCES WRCES WRCES

1Indonesia 2Philippines 3- Nepal 4- Peru 5- India 6- Sri Lanka 7- North Korea 8Vietnam 9- China 10Mexico 11- Saudi Arabia 12Mongolia 13Nigeria 14Bahrain 15- Japan 16Romania 17- Egypt 18Colombia 19Thailand 20- Chile

152.5

4

64

58

51

54

53

57

156

13

72

64

64

57

51

50

156.9 157.5 159.45 159.8

49 43 2 58

133 69 43 98

154 65 36 89

143 63 31 96

119 58 35 103

125 56 32 94

121 58 23 101

160.25 52

59

73

77

106

95

100

160.45 15

74

77

74

82

85

79

161.45 1 162 10

4 14

5 18

6 18

10 21

9 21

7 22

162.6

102

93

100

93

100

95

163.05 136

68

78

78

86

101

77

163.75 7

84

81

75

80

79

75

163.8

97

111

104

113

107

105

164.35 11 164.5 61

6 37

7 28

7 52

6 41

4 38

5 44

164.6 14 164.65 29

49 22

42 50

39 42

51 42

57 46

55 34

164.65 20

27

40

34

39

37

37

165.15 63

39

47

27

47

44

48

41

152

4

WHY DO POPULATION AND GDP PER CAPITA NOT HAVE …

89

had a better WRCES position than population rank (20%). Colombia’s sport rank was higher than that of its population only in 2014. For the other 15 countries (75%), their WRCES position was always inferior to their population’s rank. The difference between those two scores ranged from 68 (Mongolia in 2014; 136th in terms of population and 68th in the WRCES) to -105 (Nepal in 2015; 49th in terms of population and 154th in the WRCES). If we take the results of those 20 countries for six consecutive years, their average WRCES rank was 22 places lower than their population rank. The difference between the WRCES and population rank of countries with the highest average height and that of countries with the lowest average height from 2014 to 2019 is of 93 places. This undoubtedly shows the impact genetics have on sport performance and how their effect limits the importance of a large population. Without the appropriate biometric characteristics, a high number of people will be obsolete. Another argument used to support the idea that population is essential for sport performance is the one brought by Johnson and Ali (2000), which states that a high population provides a larger pool of talent from which we can have a significant number of successful athletes. This idea is actually not very accurate. First of all, having a big population does not necessarily mean that a high number of people practice sports. The Statista (Satista, 2018) website has provided information about the top 10 countries in 2018 in terms of market share in the sector of sports apparel, footwear, equipment, and bike. The results were the following: 1. USA (32.29%) 2. China (12.65%) 3. Japan (4.61%) 4. Germany (4.35%) 5. France (3.31%) 6. GB (2.95%) 7. South Korea (2.89%) 8. Canada (2.87%) 9. India (2.74%) 10. Italy (2.27%) As we can see, among the top ten most populated countries, seven are out of this ranking: Indonesia, Pakistan, Brazil, Nigeria, Bangladesh,

90

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

Russia, and Mexico. On the other hand, Japan (11th most populated country), Germany (17th), Great Britain (21st), France (22nd), Italy (23rd), South Korea (28th), and Canada (38th) are all present. The second most populated country, India, with 1.3 billion inhabitants, has a smaller market share than Japan, 127 million (10 times less than India), Germany; 83 million (15 times less), GB; 67 million (19 times less), France; 65 million (20 times less), South Korea; 51 million (25 times less), and Canada; 37 million (35 times less). Participation in sport is, therefore, not dependent on the size of the population, but on the number of people that are interested to take part in sport activities. Although the sporting goods market share ranking involves ten of the 12 wealthiest countries, the order of the ranking shows that certain societies prefer to engage in sports activities more than others. Indeed, although Brazil and Russia have higher GDPs than South Korea, they are not present in the top 10 of the sporting goods market share while South Korea is 7th, before wealthier countries such as Canada, India, and Italy. Table 4.4 will show the difference in the top five between the sporting goods market share and other products related to leisure activities: alcoholic drinks, luxury goods, tobacco, and movies. Brazil, Indonesia, and Russia are respectively in the top 5 of the alcoholic drinks, tobacco, and movie theater sectors, but are not in the top 10 of the sporting goods industry. All the countries cited in Table 4.4 are among the 20 wealthiest countries in the world. Wealth is, therefore, important to be present in any international market. However, the difference will be made by the social behavior present in each country. Table 4.4 Comparison between sporting goods and other product markets (Statista, 2020) Ranking

Sporting goods market share

Alcoholic drinks market share

Luxury goods market share

Tobacco market share

Number of movie ticket sales market share

1 2 3 4 5

USA China Japan Germany France

USA China Japan Brazil GB

USA China Japan France GB

China USA Germany GB Indonesia

India China USA Mexico Russia

4

WHY DO POPULATION AND GDP PER CAPITA NOT HAVE …

91

Some societies prefer to take part in sports more than others. The development of a sport culture, talked about in Chapter 2, will increase the mass participation (Nassif, 2010, p. 55), which will offer the potential to extract a pool of talented athletes. Actually, except India, all other countries that made it to the top 10 in the sporting goods industry were ranked within the 16 best in the six editions of the WRCES (WRCES, 2020). The second reason is related to the structure implemented to select the best athletes. This will affect the importance of both population and GDP per capita. Indeed, although there are big differences between countries in terms of sport legislation (as seen in Tables 2.19a and 2.19b of Chapter 2), the sources of funding are in the following order: households, local communities, government, and private companies (Miege, 2011, p. 48). Households are the main contributors at the grassroot level. Local communities are in charge of funding the sport infrastructures and local clubs. The government and the private sector provide the budget for elite sport, as we can see in Fig. 4.1. As seen in Fig. 4.1, elite sport is at the pinnacle of the competitive sport pyramid. Elite athletes’ sports skills are the finest of their countries but

Government and private sector

Local communities

Elite sport

Local clubs and local infrastructure

Households

Grassroots participants

Fig. 4.1 Sources of funding of the different sectors of the sport movement

92

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

their number is much lower than those who play the sport at grassroots. For example, there are more than two million registered male football players in France (French Football Federation, 2020), but only 1,100 are professional, which represents 0.05% (Duhautois, 2015). While a very thin number of athletes will reach the elite level, all the elite athletes have been “selected” from grassroots sport (Bertrand, 2009). Grassroots sports are, therefore, essential for a country to succeed in sport. The more an athlete is trained, the more their skills will improve (Serrano, 2013). Grassroots sport programs allow youth to expand their experience in sport and thus improve their sports-specific skills. The participation of children in grassroots competitions is indispensable to provide more experienced athletes at the elite level. However, it is very difficult to quantify its share in the success considering that elite sport results are also obtained from the funding of the local communities as well as the private and public sectors. Since youth participation is tributary of household income, the latter will, therefore, contribute to elite sport success. Here resides the question mark on the low correlation between the WRCES and the GDP per capita (see Table 3.1 in Chapter 3). If grassroots sports, which are essential to provide national teams with talented athletes, are funded by households, why is the GDP per capita, which determines these households’ wealth, not important for countries’ success in elite sport? The answer to this question actually resides in the accessibility a country’s citizens have to competitive sport infrastructure: clubs, stadiums, and coaches. A professor from the Belarusian State University of Physical Culture, Natalia Matsius, former national competitor in Rhythmic Gymnastics, informed us (April, 2018) that children in most of the countries that were part of the Soviet Union can start their training program to become future athletes in a wide range of sports for free. This governmental help was very fruitful for their success in sport. With the 84th GDP per capita in the world, Belarus was always ranked in the top 45 in the WRCES. Accordingly, its lack of wealth does not constitute a disadvantage because the local communities are providing the citizens with all the necessary conditions to train for their sport. The performance of Belarus confirms the statements of Henry et al. (2020) arguing that the GDP per capita has no real impact on countries’ success in elite sport, because the latter is mainly determined by the financial support it receives. The main funder of grassroots sport development is, therefore, not the households’ wealth, but the interest that the government and/or the

4

WHY DO POPULATION AND GDP PER CAPITA NOT HAVE …

93

local communities have in providing their citizens with opportunities to participate in sport competitions. The example of Belarus is in line with the findings of Green and Houlihan (2005, p. 1), according to whom the successful sporting nations are either the wealthy industrial or the former/current communist countries, which invest largely on sport. We have verified this theory by taking a sample of 20 countries from the East European Block, all former communist countries, and comparing their WRCES position with their GDP per capita and population ranks. We have found that out of these 20 countries, 13 (65%) got a better WRCES than a GDP per capita rank for six consecutive years: Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Russia, Bulgaria, Serbia, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia, and Ukraine. Lithuania was granted a better WRCES than GDP per capita rank in 2015, 2016, and 2018. For Latvia, it was only in 2016. Even if 65% is not a huge majority, the average of the difference between the WRCES and GDP per capita rankings of these 13 countries is 35 places. On the other hand, in the seven countries where the GDP per capita is higher, the difference is only nine. We performed the same comparison between the WRCES and the population ranks of these twenty countries from 2014 to 2019. We have found that, for six consecutive years, all the twenty former communist countries had a sport rank equal or superior to that of the population. Actually, only Ukraine’s WRCES position tied with that of the population in 2017 and 2018. It was superior in 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2019. For the other 19 countries (95%), the WRCES rank was always superior. These results show how much the importance of the population and GDP per capita is reduced by the governments’ political interest in succeeding in elite sport. A national sport policy is highly influenced by a country’s political climate. Without a will to access international recognition through sport, winning becomes impossible no matter how populated a country is. This state of affairs can also be seen in the comparison of Lebanon to Estonia and Jamaica (Nassif, 2017). Lebanon has a population of 6.2 million inhabitants, more than twice that of Jamaica (2.9 millions) and five times that of Estonia (1.3 millions). Apart from being more populated, the expenditures of the Lebanese government (an average of 13.53 billion USD from 2014 to 2019) are more than three times higher than those of the Jamaican government (an average of 3.941

94

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

billion USD from 2014 to 2019) and 1.5 higher than those of Estonia (an average of 8.975 billion USD from 2014 to 2019). When it comes to sport, however, the annual budget allocated by the Lebanese government is 8 million USD, 50 times lower than that of Jamaica (400 million US$) and 44 times lower than that of Estonia (350 million US$). Lebanon’s budget for sport, thus, represents 0.06% of the country’s expenditure. Meanwhile, Jamaica’s sports budget represents 10% of its government’s allocation and Estonia’s 3.9%. Sport in Jamaica is not only a matter of national pride, but a way to boost the country’s GDP (Nassif, 2017). The Jamaican government is committed to “move sport front and center of economic growth”. By promoting the Jamaican brand through “Jamaica House”, a marketing initiative using the popularity and success of world-class athletes like Usain Bolt, it intends to exploit opportunities to promote Jamaican culture and tourism and “hopefully bring in new business (Nassif, 2019)”. In Estonia as well, sport is a national affair. 10% of the Estonians are registered in competitive sport clubs (compared to the 0.7% of the Lebanese). The Estonian government, which placed sport under the authority of the Ministry of Culture, is obliged to invest an important budget to meet the needs of this large population of athletes (Nassif, 2017). With more funding, the Jamaican and Estonian governments can attract more talented athletes and give them an infrastructure to succeed. Why despite having higher financial means and expenditures than Jamaica, is the Lebanese government not investing in elite sport? To answer this question, it is important to examine the Lebanese political system and its vision toward sport. After centuries of foreign invasions and civil wars (Salibi, 2003), the Lebanese republic was established with a constitution that offers to the 18 officially recognized communities a quota in the government equal to their size in the population (Nassif & Amara, 2015). Lebanese politicians believed that this multiconfessional political system, based on a compromise, was essential to ensure political stability. Despite these preventive measures, tensions remained and conflicts burst, the major one occurring between 1975 and 1990. The search for power balance among the different communities turned into a power struggle that regularly freezes the successive governments’ activities. This showdown for confessional overrepresentation is systematically reproduced in the other sectors: Media, health, education, and sport (Reiche, 2011). The struggle for

4

WHY DO POPULATION AND GDP PER CAPITA NOT HAVE …

95

political overrepresentation in sports is done at the expense of developing a national transparent and functional national sport structure. Most of the NSFs’ members are appointed following arrangements made under the table by Lebanese politicians (Blanc, 2004; Boukhater, 2004; Nassif & Amara, 2015; Nseir, 2012; Reiche, 2011). The concern to win an internal political battle has systematically inhibited the will to succeed in international competitions (Nassif, 2017). This is the main reason behind the meager budget allocated to elite sport. To date (2022), no policy has been implemented or even drafted by the Lebanese Ministry of Youth and Sports (LMYS) and the Lebanese Olympic Committee (LOC) elaborating a short-, medium-, or long-term strategy targeting success in elite sport. These facts allowed Jamaica and Estonia to easily outperform a much more populated country like Lebanon, as we can see in Table 4.5: The objective of this chapter was to measure the importance of population and GDP per capita, which were two of the macro-factors advocated by scholars undertaking research on the variables leading to countries’ success in elite sport. We have focused much on population, considering how often the media and sport administrators refer to the medals per Table 4.5 Comparisons between Lebanon, Jamaica, and Estonia in the years 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 (The sports budgets of these countries were similar in those six years. For the population, we took the average of these six years) Countries Population Annual2014 2015 WRCES Budget WRCES Ranking Ranking for Sport

2016 2017 2018 2019 WRCES WRCES WRCES WRCES RankingRankingRankingRanking

Lebanon 6.2 million inhabitants Estonia 1.3 million inhabitants Jamaica 2.9 million inhabitants

8 95th million USD

97th

114th

99th

91st

97th

350 58th million USD

57th

58th

56th

54th

56th

400 63rd million USD

43rd

56th

69th

58th

49th

96

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

capita ranking, implying that the less populated countries have a big disadvantage, and therefore, the countries that top this ranking are seen as being the most efficient. By using the WRCES, we have found that the population is actually not an asset but rather has a much lesser importance than GDP, research output, geography, genetics, as well as cultural and political interest. When countries with small populations succeed, they are not necessarily “punching above their weight”. Indeed, a low GDP, unfavorable climatic conditions, inadequate genetics, lack of scientific research, and cultural and political interest are much more challenging obstacles to overcome. Rating the countries that are over-performing is very complex and must consider all these variables. One of the possible ways to achieve this is the establishment of a parallel WRCES merit’s ranking, which will be based on the difference between the WRCES and the GDP rankings. The higher this difference in the advantage of the WRCES, the better the WRCES merit’s ranking will be. We are opting to use the GDP as a benchmark, first because of the strong correlation between the WRCES and the GDP and then because funding is the only component that cannot be avoided in view of implementing meso- and micro-level strategies. This “special ranking” will highlight the achievements of many underdog nations. However, it should be used with caution, as the one topping it should not be considered the most efficient. Indeed, we cannot assume that Switzerland (20th in the GDP ranking) will have a better WRCES position than France if it has a similar GDP (7th GDP in the world), or that France will be below Switzerland in the WRCES if it has a similar GDP to Switzerland. As a theoretical example, if the French region of “Ile de France” was a country, its GDP would place it just behind Switzerland in the GDP ranking. We do not have solid evidence that this French region will rank below Switzerland in the WRCES considering all the other variables that must be examined. In addition, a country like the USA that is topping both the GDP and WRCES rankings will systematically never be able to achieve a good position in this merit’s ranking. The insignificant importance of population and GDP per capita has highlighted the impact of the following factors: Wealth; scientific knowledge; geography; genetics; cultural interest; and political interest. These six variables will constitute the base of our analysis to identify the general model that leads countries to succeed in elite sport. In Chapter 5, we will see how they are related to each other.

4

WHY DO POPULATION AND GDP PER CAPITA NOT HAVE …

97

References Andreff, W. (2013). Economic development as major determinant of Olympic medal wins: Predicting performances of Russian and Chinese teams at Sochi Games. International Journal of Economic Policy in Emerging Economies, 6(4), 314–340. Bertrand, J. (2009). Entre “passion” et incertitude: La socialisation au métier de footballeur professionnel. Sociologie Du Travail, 51(3), 361–378. Blanc, P. (2004). Le sport au Liban: un révélateur de la société. Les Cahiers de Confluences, 159–161. Boukhater, L. (2004). Basket au Liban - Outre terre. Revue Française De Géopolitique, 8, 129–130. 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. Meyer & Meyer Sport. Duhautois, R. (2015). Le marché du travail des footballeurs professionnels: un miroir aux alouettes?. Connaissance de l’emploi, (122). Emrich, E., Klein, M., Pitsch, W., & Pierdzioch, C. (2012). On the determinants of sporting success–A note on the Olympic Games. Economics Bulletin, 32(3), 1890–1901. Green, M., & Houlihan, B. (2005). Elite sport development: Policy learning and political priorities. Routledge. Henry, I., Dowling, M., Ko, L. M., & Brown, P. (2020). Challenging the new orthodoxy: A critique of SPLISS and variable-oriented approaches to comparing sporting nations. European Sport Management Quarterly, 20(4), 520–536. Interview with Natalia Matsius, professor in physical education in the Belarusian State University of Physical Culture, in Minsk, Belarus, April 2018 Johnson, D. K., & ali, A. (2000). Coming to play or coming to win: Participation and success at the Olympic Games (Working Paper, 2000–10). Wellesley College Dept. of Economics. Miege C. in the book written by Sobry, C. (Ed.). (2011). Sports governance in the world: a socio-historic approach; the organization of sport in Europe: A patch-work of institutions, with few shared points. Ed. Le Manuscrit. Nassif, N. (2010). Sport Policy in Lebanon, 1975 to 2004: Lebanese Geopolitical background, Lebanese Sport Characteristics and Difficulties Plan for Development. Lambert Academic Publishing GMBH & Co.KG. Nassif, N. (2017). Factors behind Lebanon’s difficulties achieving success at the Olympics. The International Journal of the History of Sport, 34(13), 1366– 1381.

98

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

Nassif, N. (2019). Developing national elite sport policy in an Arab country: The case of Lebanon. In D. R. Reiche & T. Sorek (Eds.), Sport, politics and society in the Middle East. Oxford University Press. Nassif, N., & Amara, M. (2015). Sport, policy and politics in Lebanon. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 7 (3), 443–455. Nseir, G. (2012). Des communautés et des sports au Liban: enjeux des regroupements sportifs et des rencontres intercommunautaires, Doctoral dissertation, Strasbourg. Official website of Abidjan News, http://news.abidjan.net/h/636590.html. Retrieved in 2018. Official website of Abidjan News, http://news.abidjan.net/h/636590.html. Retrieved in May 2020. Official website of boxrec, https://boxrec.com/en/ratings. Retrieved in May 2020. Official website of “Mendel” museum, https://mendelmuseum.muni.cz/en/gj-mendel/zivotopis. Retrieved in May 2020. Official website of the French Football Federation, https://www.fff.fr/la-fff/org anisation/chiffres-cles-fff. Retrieved in 2020. Official website of the French Football Federation, https://www.fff.fr/la-fff/org anisation/chiffres-cles-fff Official website of the New York Sun, http://www.nysun.com/sports/project119-didnt-work-despite-chinas-gold-lead/84420/. Retrieved in 2020. Official website of the Ring Magazine, https://www.ringtv.com/ratings/. Retrieved in May 2020. Official website of the statistic portal “Statista”, https://www-statista-com. ezproxy.aub.edu.lb/statistics/915092/sports-apparel-and-footwear-marketshare-by-country-worldwide/. Retrieved in 2018. Official website of the statistic portal “Statista”, https://www-statista-com. ezproxy.aub.edu.lb/statistics/915092/sports-apparel-and-footwear-marketshare-by-country-worldwide/; https://www.statista.com/statistics/219605/ ncaa-revenue-breakdown/#:~:text=The%20statistic%20shows%20the%20reve nue,and%20marketing%20rights%20fees%20segment. Retrieved in May 2020. Official website of the World Boxing Council Muay Thai, https://www.wbcmua ythai.com/. Retrieved in May 2020. Official website of the World Counts, https://www.theworldcounts.com/challe nges/climate-change/global-warming/average-global-temperature. Retrieved in May 2020. Official website of the World Ranking of Countries in Elite Sport, www.worlds portranking.info. Retrieved in May 2020 and in January 2022. Official website of World Atlas, http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/cou ntrys/afweather.htm#page. Retrieved in May 2020.

4

WHY DO POPULATION AND GDP PER CAPITA NOT HAVE …

99

Reiche, D. (2016). Success and failure of countries at the Olympic Games. Routledge. Reiche, D. (2011). War Minus the Shooting? The politics of sport in Lebanon as a unique case in comparative politics. Third World Quarterly, 32(2), 261–277. Salibi, K. (2003). A house of many mansions: The history of Lebanon reconsidered. IB Tauris Press. Samaras, T. T. (2007). Human body size and the laws of scaling: physiological, performance, growth, longevity and ecological ramifications. Nova Publishers. Serrano, J., Shahidian, S., Sampaio, J., & Leite, N. (2013). The importance of sports performance factors and training contents from the perspective of futsal coaches. Journal of Human Kinetics, 38, 151. Servedio, M. R., Brandvain, Y., Dhole, S., Fitzpatrick, C. L., Goldberg, E. E., Stern, C. A., & Yeh, D. J. (2014). Not just a theory—The utility of mathematical models in evolutionary biology. PLoS Biology, 12(12), e1002017. Society at a Glance (2009). Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Social Indicators - OECD © 2009 - ISBN 9789264049383. GISS (Goddard Institute for Space Studies). Sotiriadou, P., & De Bosscher, V. (2018). Managing high-performance sport: Introduction to past, present and future considerations. European Sport Management Quarterly, 18(1), 1–7. Sotiriadou, K. P., & Shilbury, D. (2009). Australian elite athlete development: An organisational perspective. Sport Management Review, 12(3), 137–148. Weineck, J. (1992). Biologie du sport.

CHAPTER 5

What Are the Factors Leading to Countries’ Success in Elite Sport and How Are They Related?

Abstract There are two types of factors that lead to countries’ success in elite sport: The natural, which are invariable, and human ones, which can be altered by human will. Given that the changes of the natural factors (geography and genetics) are not significant over time, they are the first pre-requisites for success. These natural factors will be directly followed by human ones, the first being the political and cultural interests. The latter will actually allow for the founding and funding of the principal stakeholders of a national sport system: The NSGBs, NOCs, NSFs, and sports associations, whose transparency and expertise in implementing the coordinated elite sport policies are indispensable to achieve success. Keywords Factors · Countries · Success · Elite · Sport

5.1

Introduction

In Chapter 4, we have found that wealth, scientific knowledge, genetics, geography, as well as cultural and political interests are the determining components impacting countries’ performances in sport. The objective of this chapter is to set them in an order of priority. To achieve this, we will divide them in two: The natural factors and the human ones. © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 N. Nassif and M. Raspaud, National Success in Elite Sport, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38997-9_5

101

102

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

Natural factors are those that cannot be changed while human factors are those that can be altered by men’s will. This chapter will allow us to understand the general mechanism that explains the factors leading to countries’ success in elite sport.

5.2

Natural Factors Come First

The variations of the natural factors over time are insignificant. If we take geography, a research done by the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has found that the world average temperature has increased from 13.73 °C in 1880 to 14.51 in 2000 and 14.88 in 2020 (NASA, 2020). This raise of just over one degree in 140 years will not allow countries without snow to become snowy or those that have snow to lose it. Consequently, geography is a natural factor that will always penalize the winter sport performances of countries that do not have snow. For Migliano and Guillon (2012), differences in temperature, humidity, or diet affect interpopulation differences in stature. But finding out the exact reasons behind a population’s average height is very complex and these natural factors can therefore not be controlled by a national program. In that aspect, as we saw in chapter 4, countries having short average height will be penalized in the final ranking. Thus, like geography, genetics represent another natural factor affecting countries’ performances in elite sport. Unlike geography and genetics, wealth, scientific knowledge, as well as cultural and political interest are all the results of actions and plans undertaken by people. Since these three human factors have a large impact on countries’ success in sport, it is important to understand how they can be put together to yield a winning formula. Although wealth has an undoubtable importance, comparing Lebanon to Jamaica and Estonia in chapter 4 highlighted that it will not have an impact on the performance if no decision to fund the sport movement is made. Wealth and scientific knowledge are major assets if there is a will from the government to use them in order to develop elite sport. Putting sport on the national agenda can even compensate the absence of advantageous geography and genetics. Indeed, Dubai, an emirate of the United Arab Emirates (UAE), despite having a tropical desert climate, has used its wealth to build an ice rink (“Dubaiicerink”, 2020) and ski resort (“Ski Dubai”, 2020) that will allow the practice of all the winter sports in this

5

WHAT ARE THE FACTORS LEADING TO COUNTRIES’ …

103

city. Theoretically, if some countries intend to succeed in sport events where they do not have the proper genetics, they can naturalize foreign athletes. The naturalization strategy in elite sport was already used by countries (“L’Equipe”, 2020), not necessarily to compensate a genetic weakness, but to succeed in sports where they would not have a chance to achieve their objectives if they field their local players. In 2015, Qatar hosted the 24th Handball Men World Championship on its home soil. As part of its international sport strategy (Amara, 2013), Qatar naturalized thirteen of its squad’s seventeen players. This move allowed Qatar to make it to the final only to lose against four times world champion and two time Olympic champion France at the time. Before using this strategy, Qatar qualified four times to the Handball World Championship: In 2003 (where it was ranked 16th out of 24), 2005 (where it was ranked 21st out of 24), 2007 (where it was ranked 23rd out of 24), and 2013 (where after failing to qualify for the 2009 and 2011 editions, it was ranked 20th out of 24 winning one game and losing six.) The naturalization strategy allowed Qatar Men Handball National Team to qualify for the 2016 Olympics Men Handball tournament for the first time (“L’Equipe”, 2020). In the 2016 Olympics, 65% of the Qatari Olympic delegation were foreign-born athletes (Reiche & Tinaz, 2019). Another Arab country, Bahrain, owes its three Olympic medals to naturalized athletes originating from Ethiopia and Kenya (Reiche & Tinaz, 2019). 24% of the athletes of the 2016 Olympics Turkish delegation were coming from 16 different countries: Kenya, China, Jamaica, Ethiopia, Cuba, Azerbaijan, South Africa, Germany, USA, Latvia, Georgia, France, Bulgaria, Ukraine, Turkmenistan, and Russia (Reiche & Tinaz, 2019). In the 1960 Rome Olympics, the Kenyan Hockey national team selected eight Indians to help it reach the quarter final of the Hockey Olympic tournament. In the 2012 Olympics, GB’s national handball team consisted of only eight local players. New Zealand (NZ), the most successful country in rugby union’s history, regularly “collects” a large number of players from the neighboring pacific islands (L’Equipe, 2020). In the Athens Olympic Games in 2004, from the 21 players of its baseball national team roster, Greece fielded 17 North American players (L’Equipe, 2020). In Gymnastics, Oksana Chusovitina competed for the Soviet Union, Uzbekistan, and Germany. In weightlifting, Naim Suleimanov represented Bulgaria before playing for Turkey under the name of Naim Suleymanoglu. In short-track speed skating, Viktor Ahn competed for Russia in 2014 and South Korea in 2018 (L’Equipe, 2020).

104

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

Accordingly, with a political interest first and financial resources second, funds can be found and allocated to compensate for a country’s “natural disadvantages”. However, building infrastructures that create different climatic conditions and naturalizing athletes is very expensive, especially for non-wealthy countries. Thus, geography and genetics are factors which influences cannot be undermined in international sport competitions. As a matter of fact, as we discussed in chapter 4, no country was able to succeed in winter sports without having snow. Concerning genetics, we have also seen how countries with low average heights struggled to achieve a good ranking in the WRCES. Consequently, even if they can alter the results of a limited number of sports, geography and genetics are the first pre-requisites for success. These natural factors will be directly followed by human ones, the first being the political and cultural interests. The latter will actually create a general infatuation for sport which will generate the funding for the strategies undertaken at meso- and micro-level. How do political and cultural interests interact to create this mechanism?

5.3 Political and Cultural Interests and Funding Come Next Political interest is characterized by the will that the public actors, government, and local communities have in developing elite sport. The cultural one is related to the citizens’ drive to take part in the sport movement. Both inputs constitute what Stewart et al. call “top-down” and “bottomup” actions in management research (Stewart et al., 2015). “Top down” is when a decision is taken at the top of the hierarchy to lead the changes at the bottom. In the context of elite sport, this will be related to the actions taken by the public actors. “Bottom up” is “an incremental change approach that represents an emergent process cultivated and upheld primarily by frontline workers”. In sport, these “frontline workers” are the people at grassroots level. For Stewart et al. (2015), counting exclusively on a top-down approach will not be efficient in developing commitment to spread the implementation of reforms (Stewart et al., 2015). Meanwhile, relying solely on the bottom-up approach will not allow a sufficient gathering of resources to succeed in effecting changes. Stewart et al. (2015) found that combining both approaches is the key for long-term success.

5

WHAT ARE THE FACTORS LEADING TO COUNTRIES’ …

105

The implementation of a “top-down” elite sport policy is achieved through the collaboration and coordination of both the central government and local communities. The weight these stakeholders have in decision-making differs from a country to another depending on the governance system in place, as we have seen in the examples provided in Table 2.3 in Chapter 2. The local communities’ role is to provide the local sport clubs, or Sport Associations (SAs), with the conditions to attract grassroots participants and then youth athletes to develop their skills. The more these SAs receive support from their communities, the better equipped they will be to succeed. If a country has a national system that strengthens the capacities of all the local communities in this endeavor, the development of sport in all its regions will be more optimal. France, used as an example Chapter 2, is an example that followed this path. It is mainly the national policy of decentralization undertaken in the 80s that gave more financial power to the French regions, allowing the build-up of the appropriate sport facilities which the citizens could use to train for free (Callède, 2002). The support offered by the local communities to the SAs is the key element of the development of grassroots and youth sport in France and Western Europe (Van Bottenburg, 2013). In the USA, the model is formally different since sports are mainly organized by schools, colleges, and universities. However, this does not mean that the difference between North America and Western Europe is radical. Indeed, according to Van Bottenburg (2013), the main providers for grassroots and youth sports in these two models are the same: schools and SAs. The difference lies in the weight these providers have on the sport movement in these two geographic entities: In the USA, schools are the leaders, while in Europe, the SAs play this role. But in both places, youth and grassroots sports are supported by the local communities because the sport facilities of the American educational institutions are built mainly thanks to public money (Van Bottenburg, 2013). The West European and North American sport models are commonly used by scholars as a benchmark for national sport policy (Andreff, 2011; Bairner, 2001; Fredricks & Eccles, 2008; Halgreen, 2004; Ibrahimo, 2003; Nafziger, 2008). We do believe that these models should be taken as a reference if we intend to consider the ingredients of success in elite sport. Indeed, in the 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 WRCES, the USA, Germany, France, and GB were always ranked among the top seven countries in sport, with the USA always “leading the dance” (WRCES, 2022).

106

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

The support given in these countries at a local level to the schools or SAs will facilitate the development of sport at a national level. Indeed, in the West European model, clubs will form the NSFs that will regulate their sport. While in the USA, the educational institutions will regroup to create the committees or commissions that will act as NSFs and organize the competitions at a state or national level (Van Bottenburg, 2013). In this book, whether a club or educational institution, it will be called SA. The “bottom-up” actions start with the initiative of a passionate group of people. The latter has actually allowed the blossoming of many sports around the world. Basketball was invented by the Canadian physical education instructor James Naismith (FIBA, 2020). Football, in its modern form, was created by students from the University of Cambridge (FIFA, 2020). Volleyball was invented by the former American YMCA (Young Men’s Christian Association) physical education director William J. Morgan. The modern rules of Golf were established by the R&A Golf Club of St Andrews in the eighteenth century (IGF, 2020). The Olympic movement started with the initiative of the Baron Pierre De Coubertin in the nineteenth century. The phenomenon of governmental intervention in sport, called the “governmentalization” of sport by Bergsgard et al. (2009), mainly started after World War II. Whether in the North American or European model, the SAs are the ones that form the NSFs which are recognized and regulated by the government (Van Bottenburg, 2013) through national bodies that differ from a country to another as explained in Table 2.3 of Chapter 2 (Miege, 2011, pp. 65–66). Sport is, therefore, formally created in each country by the SAs that are founded by private individuals in many cases. The elite sport policy, however, will start when the government and local communities (public actors) support the SAs and NSFs in forming a strategy to succeed in international competitions. For this to happen, citizens of a country must have the will and take the initiative to approach the local communities and/or government to create the platform that will regroup the SAs and NSFs. Due to the historical, political, and social differences between each country, it is very difficult to identify which stakeholders usually undertook the first step; the citizens or the public actors. What is unquestionable, however, is that the input of both the citizens and public actors is indispensable to strengthen the SAs and NSFs. In addition, the members of both the SAs and NSFs must often practice strong lobbying to attract this public funding.

5

WHAT ARE THE FACTORS LEADING TO COUNTRIES’ …

107

While the public actors offer financial and material support to the SAs and NSFs, the citizens, by frequently volunteering and giving their free time to organize sport events and coach youth (Hoye et al., 2019), are also performing tasks that can only be carried out by paid employees. Therefore, in a way, they are also funding the SAs and NSFs. In chapter 2, we saw that the public actors invest in sport because they are keen to have sport contribute to their country’s national pride and international prestige. What drives a country’s citizens to volunteer to develop sport is not very different as their main motivation is to contribute to their community (Dhurup & Surujlal, 2008). So basically, by investing in sport, the citizens and public actors are seeking to serve their country by achieving one or all of the different outcomes mentioned by De Bosscher et al. (2015, p. 47): strengthening national pride, boosting its international prestige, and creating a good feeling and public interest of sport among its population. The citizens and public actors will thus support the SAs and NSFs which will have the formal role of developing sport at a local and national level. Another stakeholder that is created as a result of the top-down and bottom-up approach between the public sector and the citizens is the NOC. The NOC is mandated by the IOC to “develop, promote, and protect the Olympic Movement in their respective countries (IOC, 2020)”. Only an NOC is entitled to select and send teams and competitors for participation in the Olympic Games. As we saw in Table 2.1 of Chapter 2, due to the weak intervention of the state in sport in many countries, the NOCs have a lot of autonomy. Therefore, their influence on the national sport movement is generally large. In Italy, they are also in charge of the governmental law for sport (Miege, 2011). Since the NOCs give recognition and regroup the NSFs that participate in the regional and Olympic games, many of their tasks are undertaken by volunteers. Like the SAs and NSFs, the NOCs are, therefore, supported by the citizens and public actors. As part of their missions, the NOCs are committed to the development of athletes and support the development of high performance sport programs in their countries. They also participate in the training of sports administrators by organizing educational programs (IOC, 2020). Although they have a great degree of autonomy, the NOCs are rarely alone in leading the sport movement. They share this role with the NSGBs, which can differ from a country to another as we saw in Table 2.3 in Chapter 2. In Spain, it is the Ministry of Education, in France the

108

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

Ministry of Sports, in Greece the Ministry of Culture, in Luxembourg the Ministry of Physical Education and Sports, and in Portugal the Prime Minister and State Secretary for Sport. Those five countries have a very strong state intervention in the sport movement. In Germany, Austria, and Belgium where government interference is weak, the NSGBs are regulating the sport movement through local communities. In Denmark, where state intervention is also reduced, the NSGB; here the Ministry of Culture monitors all matters related to high performance sport. Accordingly, whether they have a moderate or high influence, the NSGBs are in many cases active stakeholders in the sport movement (Miege, 2011). They are funded either by the central government or by the local communities, so they belong to the top-down actions implemented by the public actors. The political and cultural interests are the factors that allow the founding and funding of the principal stakeholders of a national sport system: The NSGBs, NOCs, NSFs, and SAs. The amount of funding greatly depends on the country’s total wealth, hence the importance of the GDP, rather than the GDP per capita, as we have explained in Chapters 3 and 4. The NSGBs, NOCs, and NSFs will coordinate to undertake the actions at a meso-level and the SAs at a micro-level. Besides the funding, what will lead them to success is their will to succeed, the transparency of their work, and their expertise.

5.4 Transparency in the Sport System and Expertise Will Finalize Success It should be obvious that when it comes to elite sport, the stakeholders of the national sport system’s only interest are to implement the best strategies to succeed. However, this is not evident and does not necessarily apply everywhere. Lebanon is a very relevant example of this state of affairs. As we have seen in Chapter 4, sport in Lebanon represents an arena for a struggle of overrepresentation between the different political parties that is strongly hindering the will to implement policies to succeed in elite sport. This situation causes what Nassif (2014) called “administrative corruption”, where people are put in key positions in the LMYS, LOC, and the Lebanese NSFs based on their political affiliations rather than capacities. Lebanese athletes regularly criticize the situation by talking about “deficient management” and “lack of professionalism” (Nassif, 2014).

5

WHAT ARE THE FACTORS LEADING TO COUNTRIES’ …

109

Another characteristic of this corruption resides in the allocation of funds. The distribution of funds allocated to the LMYS, which is the main NSGB in charge of the governance of sport in Lebanon, lacks transparency. Indeed, there is “an absence of auditing and evaluation, leading to abuses within various sport organizations” (Nassif, 2014). As a matter of fact, in addition to not distributing funds clearly, money is only granted to those NSFs and SAs which have political connections. Actually, LMYS officials issue annual guidelines indicating which NSFs and SAs have a right to financial aid in accordance with the work they are doing. However, when the LMYS is about to implement the guidelines, it receives ‘phone calls’ from politicians asking to help ‘friendly’ NSAs and SAs”, some of the latter being fictitious, only existing to vote for the same NSFs members to be elected again. This kind of corruption is also very present in the organization of international competitions in Lebanon. In 2015, Lebanon was due to host the Pan Arab Games. Highly-placed administrators from the LMYS asked a sport marketing specialist to establish a business plan to market this competition (Nassif, 2014). This person (who preferred to remain anonymous) asked for a specific budget for this marketing campaign. The feedback of the LMYS officials was: “Why are you asking for this amount? Ask for more, we will split it 50/50”. This corresponds to the account of a member of the LOC who stated that the only purpose of some Lebanese sport movement leaders behind the organization of international competitions is to benefit from the lack of audit and evaluation to ask for an inflated budget and divert money. The lack of transparency is also scaring away private investors who are not keen to invest in organizations “they do not trust (Nassif, 2014)”. As a result, and in addition to the very scarce resources the public sector allocates to sport (see chapter 4), the Lebanese NSFs are underfunded. Consequently, the results of Lebanon in international sport remain very modest. It will be particularly relevant to see how good governance affects elite sport results in other countries. A project study entitled National Sports Governance Observer (NSGO), coordinated by the Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) “Play the Game” and the Danish Institute for Sports Studies, has measured governance in NSFs in nine different countries (Cyprus, Denmark, Belgium, Germany, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Romania, Brazil, and Montenegro) based on four dimensions (“Play the Game”, 2018): Transparency; democracy process; internal accountability and control; and societal responsibility.

110

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

Due to the limited number of countries where this research was conducted, it is difficult to undertake correlation studies between good governance and sport results. But by looking at the case of Lebanon, we can see that corruption will prevent the specialists from reaching key positions in the SAs, NSGBs, NOCs, and NSFs. Transparency is essential for the functioning of the national sport system, and thus the expertise to implement successful elite sport policies at the meso- and micro-levels. The objective of Chapter 5 was to show how the different factors leading to countries’ performances in elite sport are related. Natural factors (geography and genetics) are the first pre-requisites, followed by political and cultural interests, then funding. Once money is poured into the sport structure, transparency will create the adequate environment which will allow the different stakeholders to undertake the proper strategies at a meso- and micro-level. As we saw in Chapter 2, the achievement of success will create a virtuous circle which will allow the repetition of the mechanism. This is explained in Fig. 5.1.

Geography/ Genetics Natural environment pre-requisite for the different macro, meso, and micro level factors

Interest of the public actors (government and local communities)

Interest of the citizens to participate, coach, or organize sport activities

COUNTRIES’ SUCCESS IN ELITE SPORT

Funding (in money and infrastructure) Depends largely on the wealth of the country Funding (through volunteering)

Transparency and Expertise of the SAs, NSAs, NSGBs, and NOCs in implementing coordinated policies to succeed in elite sport

Fig. 5.1 Order of the factors leading to countries’ success in elite sport

5

WHAT ARE THE FACTORS LEADING TO COUNTRIES’ …

111

Expertise in implementing the proper policies is the last “link of the chain” to achieve success in elite sport. This factor involves multiple components which will be further examined in Chapter 6.

References Amara, M. (2013). The pillars of Qatar’s international sport strategy. EInternational Relations, 29. Andreff, W. (2011). Some comparative economics of the organization of sports: Competition and regulation in north American vs. European professional team sports leagues. The European Journal of Comparative Economics, 8(1), 3–27. Bairner, A. (2001). Sport, nationalism, and globalization: European and North American perspectives. Suny Press. Bergsgard, N. A., Houlihan, B., Mangset, P., Nødland, S. I., & Rommetvedt, H. (2009). Sport policy. Routledge. Callède, J. P. (2002). Les politiques du sport en France. L’année Sociologique, 52(2), 437–457. 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. Meyer & Meyer Sport. Dhurup, M., & Surujlal, J. (2008). Retaining sport volunteers: An exploratory study of volunteer motives management. African Journal for Physical Health Education, Recreation and Dance, 14(1), 19–35. Fredricks, J. A., & Eccles, J. S. (2008). Participation in extracurricular activities in the middle school years: Are there developmental benefits for African American and European American youth? Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 37 (9), 1029–1043. Halgreen, L. (2004). European sports law: A comparative analysis of the European and American models of sport. Forlaget Thomson. Hoye, R., Cuskelly, G., Auld, C., Kappelides, P., & Misener, K. (2019). Sport volunteering. Routledge. Ibrahimo, M. (2003). Transatlantic sport: the comparative economics of North American and European sports. Edward Elgar Publishing. Miege, C. in the book written by Sobry, C. (Ed.). (2011). Sports governance in the world: a socio-historic approach; the organization of sport in Europe: A patch-work of institutions, with few shared points. Ed. Le Manuscrit. Migliano, A. B., & Guillon, M. (2012). The effects of mortality, subsistence, and ecology on human adult height and implications for homo evolution. Current Anthropology, 53(S6), S359–S368.

112

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

Nafziger, J. A. (2008). A comparison of the European and North American models of sports organisation. The International Sports Law Journal, 3–4, 100–109. Nassif, N. (2014). Corruption in sport: The case of Lebanon. Middle East Law and Governance, 6(2), 123–140. Official website of Dubai Ice Rink. http://dubaiicerink.com/en/ Retrieved in June 2020. Official website of Ski Dubai. https://www.skidxb.com/en-ae/ski-dubai Retrieved in June 2020. Official website of the International Basketball Federation. http://www.fiba.bas ketball/history Retrieved in June 2020. Official website of the International Football Federation. https://www. fifa.com/about-fifa/who-we-are/the-game/global-growth.html Retrieved in June 2020. Official website of the International Golf Federation. https://www.igfgolf.org/ Retrieved in June 2020. Official website of the International Olympic Committee. https://www. olympic.org/ioc-governance-national-olympic-committees; https://www.oly mpic.org/olympic-solidarity-world-programmes Retrieved in June 2020. Official website of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/ Retrieved in June 2020. Official website of the Non-Governmental Organization “Play the Game”. http://www.playthegame.org/news/news-articles/2018/0536_new-studyreveals-big-gaps-in-governance-across-sports-in-europe/ Retrieved in June 2020. Official website of the newspaper “L’Equipe. https://www.lequipe.fr/Tous-spo rts/Actualites/Naturalisation-le-qatar-n-a-rien-invente/533502 Retrieved in June 2020. Official website of the World Ranking of Countries in Elite Sport. www.worlds portranking.info Retrieved in January 2022. Reiche, D., & Tinaz, C. (2019). Policies for naturalisation of foreign-born athletes: Qatar and Turkey in comparison. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 11(1), 153–171. Stewart, G. L., Manges, K. A., & Ward, M. M. (2015). Empowering sustained patient safety: The benefits of combining top-down and bottom-up approaches. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 30(3), 240–246. Van Bottenburg, M. (2013). Why are the European and American sports worlds so different? Path dependence in European and American sports history. In Sport and the Transformation of Modern Europe (pp. 217–237). Routledge.

CHAPTER 6

Expertise of the NSGBs, NOCs, NSFs, and SAs in Implementing Elite Sport Policies

Abstract At meso- and micro-levels, the different sports organizations of a national sport system must coordinate to increase the number of athletes from which they have to choose the most talented ones and place them in the best environment to succeed. The process starts first with the NSFs and SAs, which will organize grassroots and youth competitions. These coordinated strategies will only be successful if the SAs and NSFs have experts who possess the skills to frame the different activities required. This mechanism must be followed by setting up an environment that will optimize athletes’ success at the elite level, where the media and private sector are, alongside the public actors, considered essential stakeholders. Keywords Expertise · Implementing · Elite · Sport · Policies

6.1

Introduction

This final chapter is dedicated to the coordinated actions taken by the formal stakeholders, the NSGBs, NOCs, NSFs, and SAs, to apply the national sport and elite sport policies that lead to success. As we said in the literature review, considering the different systems in place around the world, we cannot identify one uniform model that defines the meso- and micro-level strategies. However, the latter have certain common patterns. © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 N. Nassif and M. Raspaud, National Success in Elite Sport, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38997-9_6

113

114

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

These organizations must mainly work on developing a mass of athletes from whom they have to select the most talented then surround them with the best conditions to succeed. The first phase is, therefore, to develop mass participation, the second to organize grassroots and youth competitions, the third to improve the skills of the athlete’s entourage, and the fourth and last one is to set up the environment that will optimize success at the elite level.

6.2

Developing Mass Participation

According to De Bosscher et al. (2015, p. 24), participation is the third pillar, after “financial support” and “organization and structure of sport policies”, that leads to success in elite sport. We have tried to measure the impact of participation on sport results by looking at the WRCES. Unlike the Olympic Medal Table, the WRCES can actually be very efficient in determining the importance of participation, considering that all the countries that take part in international competitions will gather points even if they achieve very modest results. Competing in a sport at a world stage, even without succeeding, systematically shows that there is a formal and/or official local participation from which those elite athletes are selected. Countries that manage to be ranked in a large number of sports systematically have a higher local participation. Accordingly, in order to examine if participation has an impact on sport results, we have looked at the percentage of the total number of sports in which the top 20, mid-table (the countries which positions were between 93 and 112), and bottom 20 of the WRCES final ranking were ranked for the 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 editions (WRCES, 2022). We also calculated the average percentage of the top 20, mid-table, and bottom 20 for each of these years. We have found that the top 20 were ranked in 84% of the sports on average, the mid-table in 26%, and those in the bottom 20 in 6%. This undoubtedly shows that a larger and more diverse local sport participation will systematically increase the chances to succeed on the international stage. The citizens’ infatuation with sport is therefore an essential vector in the development of elite sport. Indeed, it is this passion to engage in sport that is behind the formation of SAs, NSFs, and NOCs, and that will create the need for governments, NSGBs, and local communities to build

6

EXPERTISE OF THE NSGBS, NOCS, NSFS, AND SAS …

115

the facilities needed to increase mass participation. What are the components found in sport that attract the citizens of a country? According to Martens (1987), “each of us has wired into our genetic makeup the need for a certain amount of stimulation and excitement, or arousal. When we experience optimal arousal, fun, we are neither bored nor anxious, and this state is known as being in flow. Flow is the feeling that everything is going just right and you are totally absorbed in the activity, feeling very much in control. Sport itself possesses qualities that increase the possibility of experiencing flow and having fun, largely because it’s challenging, creative and so absorbing for mind and body”. This need for fun is what Martens called the need for stimulation. For Martens (1987), another need must also be considered when individuals engage in sport: The need for affiliation. He states that people “choose to participate in sports because they want to be part of a team. They want to belong to a group that adds significance to their lives. These people are motivated foremost to affiliate with other people and to be accepted by them. They are motivated largely to meet this need, not to achieve fame and recognition. They can accept sitting on the bench and getting to play occasionally. Performing well and winning at all costs are not as significant to them, although they will inculcate this goal, if it is a team goal, because they want to be part of the team”. However, the most powerful need in sport according to Martens (1987) is the need to feel worthy. Martens states that this need “can be met by demonstrating competence that other people recognize. It can also be met by athletes that recognize their own competence without being esteemed by others. Since their childhood, athletes quickly learn that their self-worth depends largely on their ability to achieve, and our society teaches them that winning means being successful, and losing means being a failure”. Martens believes that these three needs cannot be separated. Sport participants are generally motivated by all three of them, however, the importance of each is related to every person’s objectives and character. It is these emotions that attract and drive people into registering in SAs and participating in sport competitions. The NSFs’ main role is, therefore, to organize competitions to satisfy these needs. These competitions will actually be the motor of an elite sport policy, with grassroots and youth being the priority.

116

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

6.3 Organizing Grassroots and Youth Competitions As we saw in Chapter 2, Fig. 2.1, Zheng et al. (2019) have defined the elite sport system as a pyramid where the base consists of extracurricular sports schools. Those represent the providers of talented athletes who will make it to the provincial sports academies, from whom the very best will be selected in the provincial, national, and Olympic squads. Even if the institutions at the base of the pyramid may be different in other countries, the first objective remains the same: Developing athletes at grassroots and youth levels. This could not be achieved properly without the participation of these athletes in youth category competitions. Why? Training is crucial to improve the athletes’ technical, tactical, physical, and psychological qualities (Elliott & Mester, 2000). However, its effects are much lower than competition. Indeed, Montgomery et al. (2010) have showed how “live play is substantially more demanding” than training in “both physical and psychological attributes” in basketball. Broad et al. (1996) have demonstrated how sweat rates are greater in competition than training in basketball, netball, and football. The more the athletes hone their skills in youth competitions, the higher their chances to become proficient at the elite level. This could be observed when we look at the men youth program of Liverpool Football Club (LFC), one of world’s 50 most valuable sport teams (Forbes, 2020), which has a football academy besides the under 18 teams and under 23 age categories. The LFC academy has a director, a head of business (who manages the finances, administration, and business strategy), a head of football operations (who is responsible for implementing the “Elite Player Performance Plan” and works with players’ recruitment teams), and a head of education and welfare (who oversees the welfare, educational, and holistic progression of the players from the “Elite Development Squad”, under 18s and Under-9 Under16 schoolboy program). It has a head of pre-academy recruitment and player retention (keeping the best players in the club), a pre-academy recruitment coordinator, an Under 9–Under 16 goalkeeper coach, an Under 10–12 lead coach (“who works in the commercial area as program manager for the club international academy” where he writes, coordinates, and helps develop coaches for the international academy and Liverpool “partners around the globe”), a lead coach for pre-academy Under 5–Under 8, a performance nutritionist, an Under 6–Under 9 lead

6

EXPERTISE OF THE NSGBS, NOCS, NSFS, AND SAS …

117

coach, an assistant Under 14 coach, an assistant Under 13 coach, an Under 16 Manager, an Under 9–Under 16 fitness coach, a head of Under 11, an Under 12 coach, an Under 9–Under 14 performance analyst, an Under 9 coach, and a scouting coordinator (LFC, 2020). The Under 18 team has a manager, performance analyst, goalkeeper coach, fitness coach, physician, head of physiotherapy, and head of elite fitness development. The Under 23 team has a manager, goalkeeper coach, fitness coach, four physiotherapists, and an assistant sports scientist. The investment a global football powerhouse like LFC makes in the youth categories shows how important they are in the view of improving its senior team. This could not be achieved without the work of the NSFs, a major role of which is to organize competitions for the different age and gender categories from grassroots to the senior level. The SAs and NSFs cannot exist without each other. As we saw in part 2 of Chapter 5, whether in North America or Europe, the SAs elect or form the NSFs which official role is to develop the sport they are in charge of in their countries. As we explained in Chapter 2 with the example of France, increasing participation at grassroots and youth levels will also be assisted by the development of physical education and sports (PES) in schools (Callède, 2002). PES was also a pillar in the development of sport in the Soviet Union, one of the most powerful countries in the history of the Olympics, which success was based on a national fitness program where children could be kept down for a year if they fail their end of year physical education exam (Riordan, 1993). Comparing Lebanon to Croatia and Slovenia can also highlight the importance of PES. In Lebanon, the school official baccalaureate exam does not include a PES subject. Thousands of students are kept away from sport participation every year, which is strongly affecting the number of registered athletes in the Lebanese SAs and NSFs (Nassif, 2010, p. 112). On the other hand, Croatia and Slovenia have inherited from the former Yugoslavian sport system where every school must have sport facilities in order to have an official permit to open, and every student is obligated to choose a sport to practice as an extracurricular activity. The comparison between Lebanon, Croatia, and Slovenia is very relevant. As of 2019, Croatia is 77th in terms of GDP, Slovenia 82nd, and Lebanon 83rd. The three of them have a similar potential if they intend to invest in sport. However, the importance Slovenia and Croatia accord to developing grassroots and youth sports is placing them well ahead Lebanon in

118

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

terms of sports participation and results. In Table 6.1, we will compare the percentage of the number of sports in which Lebanon, Slovenia, and Croatia were ranked for the 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 WRCES editions (WRCES, 2022). On average, Lebanon was ranked in 30% of the sports, Slovenia in 64%, and Croatia in 67%. The grassroots and youth programs implemented in these two former Yugoslavian countries lead their sport participation to be more than double that of Lebanon. This impacts the WRCES results, with Croatia and Slovenia having much better rankings than Lebanon in the 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 WRCES editions. Table 6.2 will show the difference in the 2019 edition. On average, Lebanon’s WRCES rank is 18 places lower than its GDP’s. Therefore, considering its GDP, Lebanon is underperforming in their results in elite sport. On the other hand, Slovenia’s WRCES rank is Table 6.1 Percentage of the total number of sports in which Lebanon, Slovenia, and Croatia were ranked for the 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 WRCES editions Countries

Lebanon Slovenia Croatia

% of sports % of sports % of sports % of sports % of sports % of sports in which in which in which in which in which in which they appear they appear they appear they appear they appear they appear in the 2014 in the 2015 in the 2016 in the 2017 in the 2018 in the WRCES WRCES WRCES WRCES WRCES 2019 edition edition edition edition edition WRCES edition 34 66 71

35 60 71

26 60 67

21 58 60

33 70 65

32 67 67

Table 6.2 2019 WRCES ranks of Lebanon, Slovenia, and Croatia and their comparisons with their 2019 GDP ranking Countries

2019 WRCES ranking

2019 GDP ranking

Difference between the 2019 WRCES and GDP ranks

Lebanon Slovenia Croatia

97 47 27

83 82 77

−14 35 50

6

EXPERTISE OF THE NSGBS, NOCS, NSFS, AND SAS …

119

on average 36 places above their GDP’s and Croatia’s WRCES rank 45 places higher than their GDP’s. With regard to their wealth, Slovenia and Croatia are punching well above their weight. The comparison between Lebanon, Slovenia, and Croatia shows that the investment on grassroots and youth programs is highly beneficial with a view to succeed in elite sport. This requires the SAs to train and encourage the participation of their young athletes in the competitions which the NSFs must organize. It should also go hand in hand with a national PES program implemented in the country’s schools. These coordinated strategies will only be successful if the SAs, NSFs, and schools have experts who possess the skills to frame the different activities required to develop grassroots and youth sports.

6.4 Improving the Skills of the Athletes’ Entourage In the definition of the IOC, the athletes’ entourage consists of all the people associated with them, “including, without limitation, managers, agents, coaches, physical trainers, medical staff, scientists, sports organizations, sponsors, lawyers and any person promoting the athlete’s sporting career, including family members” (IOC, 2020). As we saw in part 2 of Chapter 6, at youth and grassroots levels, the sports organizations surrounding the athletes are the SAs (which are mainly the clubs in the European model or the schools in the North American one), the NSFs, and the schools (not their SA section, but the part related to their regular curricula). At the level of the SAs, if we set aside family members, who do not play a formal role in the athletes’ preparation as we saw with the LFC youth system, the entourage can consist of three main groups: The coaching staff, medical staff, and athletes’ management. We have taken LFC as an example because we want to explore the wide possibilities of a young athlete’s entourage. In many cases, SAs are small organizations consisting of a limited number of volunteers: One coach, the SA’s president, General Secretary, Treasurer, and members (Abi Nader, 2020). The more knowledgeable the entourage’s staff, the better the SAs’ performance. The most important component that will improve the coaches’ skills is the frequency of competitions. Moon has emphasized how learning

120

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

on-the-job is capital for coaches’ development (International Council for Coaching Excellence and the Association of Summer Olympic International Federation, 2012). For Moon (International Sport Coaching Framework, 2012), coaches learn more from self-directed reflection from their experience on the field than from clinics, seminars, or university degrees. The importance of work experience was actually highlighted by Rosen (1972). This, therefore, applies to the medical and management staff as well. As with coaches, their experience is mainly accumulated through the participation in competitions organized by the NSFs. Similarly to the SAs, there is no uniform model for NSFs. Those can vary in structure, human resources, and budget. However, despite these differences, the NSF agents in charge of the organization of competitions are the managers (or administrators) and referees (Makhov et al., 2015). As for the schools’ PES curricula, the persons in charge of applying them are the PES teachers (Nassif, 2010, p. 67). Accordingly, if we consider the SAs, NSFs, and schools, the agents working on the development of grassroots and youth sports are the following (Table 6.3): Besides the experience on the field, these agents need to improve their skills with scientific knowledge. A country with well-developed scientific research will have a higher chance to improve the know-how of its coaches, managers, medical staff, referees, and PES teachers, hence the high correlation between scientific research and elite sport results identified in Chapter 3. Here comes the importance of a major stakeholder, the university, which allows the improvement of the SAs, NSFs, and schools agents. As explained in Table 6.3, one of these actors are the medical staff. Their expertise is related to the level of medicine in every country. To measure the importance of medicine, we have compared the WRCES top 20 with the top 20 countries in medical research for the years 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019. This list was also taken from the website “SCImago Journal & Country Rank” (Scimago, 2020). Table 6.3 Agents in charge of developing grassroots and youth sports

Institutions

Agents in charge

SA NSF Schools

Coaches, managers, and medical staff Managers and referees PES teachers

6

EXPERTISE OF THE NSGBS, NOCS, NSFS, AND SAS …

121

We have found that the number of countries ranked in the WRCES top 20 and in the top 20 in terms of medical research ranged between 14 (70%) and 16 (80%). This shows how the advancement of medicine, which is provided by universities, has an impact on the performance of countries in elite sport. PES teachers are also trained in universities. The PES or sometimes called “sports sciences programs” taught in universities are hybrid curricula mixing a wide range of subjects such as education, history, first aid, motor learning, anatomy, physiology, training methodology, coaching, psychology, biomechanics, and adapted physical fitness (Nassif, 2020) … Since PES courses tackle different academic fields, high standards of scientific research will systematically lead to their improvement. PES programs also include practical courses such as athletics, gymnastics, swimming, team, combat, and racquet sports (Nassif, 2020), which implies that universities cannot be disconnected from on the field coaching programs. Higher education institutes are actually partners in the development of coaching programs. Indeed, in 2012, the International Council for Coaching Excellence (ICCE) in association with the Association of Summer Olympic International Federations (ASOIF) published a report entitled “The International Sport Coaching Framework” (ICCE & ASOIF, 2012) which provides an account on the organizations that qualify coaches. The coaching programs are actually developed by the NSFs in collaboration with the international sport federations (IFs); the NSFs in collaboration with the IFs and universities; the NSFs in collaboration with the NSGBs, like in France (“Orientation-Education”, 2020) for example. Whether they are developed solely by the NSFs and IFs or in collaboration with the universities or even the NSGBs, coaching programs have common theoretical courses such as nutrition, psychology, biomechanics, physiology, and anatomy (“Orientation-Education”, 2020). Countries where these sciences are well developed will systematically have an edge in elite sport, which shows the importance of universities. The patterns of sport management programs are also very similar to the coaching certificates. They can be offered by the NOCs in collaboration with the IOC (IOC, 2020), by universities (Nassif, 2020), or by universities in collaboration with the NOCs, such as the Executive Masters in Sport Organization Management, commonly called MEMOS (Executive Masters in Sport Organization Management, 2020). The fundamentals

122

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

of sport management are the subjects we listed in this book’s introduction: Sport governance, strategic management, organizational structure, human resources, leadership, organizational culture, financial management, sport marketing, and performance management (Hoye & Parent, 2016). Since these courses all belong to the academic fields of business, management, and accounting, we have compared the top 20 of the WRCES with the top 20 countries in the research on business, management, and accounting for the years 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019, in order to measure their impacts on elite sport performance. This information was also taken from the website “SCImago Journal & Country Rank” (Scimago, 2020). We have found that, on average, the number of countries ranked in the WRCES top 20 and in the top 20 in terms of research on business, management, and accounting is 70%. Similar to medicine, this reveals a strong correlation between scientific advancements in these subjects and countries’ results in elite sport. As for the referees, besides knowledge of the rules of the games which is taught in courses offered by the NSFs in collaboration with the ISFs, the development of their physical fitness (French Football Federation, 2020) requires good training which results from high scientific knowledge. Therefore, like for the coaches and managers, although the curricula are not always exclusively provided by the universities, the referees’ performance is systematically improved with scientific advancement. The universities, cradles of scientific research, are a major stakeholder in a national sport system. They have a very high impact on the skills of the medical staff, PES teachers, coaches, managers, and referees, who are the agents in charge of developing grassroots, youth, and as we will see in the next part of this chapter, elite sport. Table 6.4 will summarize the impact of universities on the different sport agents:

6.5 Setting Up the Environment That Will Optimize Success at the Elite Level As we saw in part VI-3, the grassroots and youth systems are the feeders of elite sport. When a young athlete’s entourage consists of skilled specialists, his/her chances to succeed at a senior level will increase. But this equation is not very simple. A formal system must exist to identify the best athletes then surround them with the best conditions to perform. This technically requires an identification system and an athletes’ support program.

6

EXPERTISE OF THE NSGBS, NOCS, NSFS, AND SAS …

123

Table 6.4 Impact of universities on the different agents of the sport system Agents

Skills needed

Organizations developing these skills

Coaching staff: Head, assistant, and/or fitness coaches (this list is not exhaustive)

Knowledge of the technique, tactics, physical, and psychological aspects of their specific sports

Managers

Knowledge of different sport management subjects

Medical staff (physicians and physiotherapists) PES teachers

Knowledge of medicine

1. NSFs in collaboration with IFs (professional certificates following a scientific approach, hence the importance of universities) 2. NSFs in collaboration with the universities 3. NSFs in collaboration with the NSGBs 1. NOCs in collaboration with the IOC (professional certificates following a scientific approach, hence the importance of universities) 2. Universities 3. NOCs in collaboration with the universities Universities

Referees

Knowledge of the different theoretical and practical subjects of PES Knowledge of the rules of their specific sports

Universities

NSFs in collaboration with the IFs (professional certificates following a scientific approach, hence the importance of universities)

According to De Bosscher (2008), few countries have a standardized talent identification system. In most cases, young athletes showcase a good performance in a local, regional, or national competition where they will be selected by scouts that work for “elite” SAs (such as Liverpool, as we saw in part 2 of Chapter 6) or for a national team staff appointed by the NSFs (like in France as we saw in Chapter 2). Overall, there is no uniform way to select talented athletes. A lack of uniformity is also observed in the ways athletes are supported. Reiche has talked about how athletes are funded by the government

124

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

(Reiche, 2016, p. 97). However, this is not the case for many of those who compete at the elite level. A sport management network hub called “sportsmanagementdegreehub” has undertaken a research on the salaries of Olympic athletes (sportsmanagementdegreehub, 2020) based on information gathered from several media and sport media websites such as The Boston Globe and Cables News Network (CNN). This is a list of American athletes who made it to the top of their sports while remaining amateurs: • Gwen Jorgensen (triathlon), works as an accountant at Ernst & Young (EY). • Dennis Bowsher (modern pentathlon), is a specialist in the US army. • Lance Brooks (discus thrower), works in a construction company. • Natalie Dell (rower), works as health researcher. • Troy Dumais (life adviser), works at the University of Texas. • Zsuzanna Francia (rower), is a fitness model and writer. • Chas Betts (wrestler), is a motion graphics designer. • Dotsie Bausch (cyclist), is a motivational speaker. • Jonathan Cheever (snowboarder), works as a plumber. • Nicole Joraanstad (curler), is a full-time Human Resources recruiter. • Emil Milev (shooter), is a physical education teacher in Florida. • Taylor Fletcher (Nordic combined skier), works as a waiter. Athletes with a double career are also found in other countries where Olympians hold full-time jobs such as: chef, fireman, farmer, janitor, landscaper, lawyer, nurse, physiotherapist, police officer, research analyst, software developer, trash collector, travel agent etc … Receiving funding from the government is rare, and if it happens, the money is not enough to allow athletes to consecrate themselves full time for their jobs. In case athletes are willing to be among the rare ones who receive funding from endorsement deals, their sports must have sufficient media exposure (sportsmanagementdegreehub, 2020). Consequently, the SAs, NSFs, NOCs, and/or NSGBs must look to attract stakeholders which input are very often indispensable to succeed at an elite level, the media, and the private sector. As we saw in Fig. 4.1 in Chapter 4, the private sector represents a main source of funding for elite sport (Miege, 2011, p. 48). According to Nassif, the more people participate in sport, the higher the number of potential fans. A larger

6

EXPERTISE OF THE NSGBS, NOCS, NSFS, AND SAS …

125

fan base will increase media attention and systematically attract private investors (Nassif, 2010, p. 66). We have tried to measure the impact of participation on fan base. Accurately calculating the size of a fan base in each country is challenging. Our objective was to have a general idea of which countries have the highest number of fans. Once those countries are identified, we will check if they have a high participation and successful results. We used the “Statista (Statista, 2020)” website to look for the average annual revenues of national sport leagues around the world from 2014 to 2019. We chose to grant one point for every billion USD. Since a league with 100 million USD of annual revenue will only give 0.1 point and therefore have little impact on the ranking we were aiming to conduct, we decided to only consider the professional leagues that have annual revenues equal or superior to 100 million USD. Table 6.5 will show the national leagues considered, the sports they involve, their countries of origin, and their revenues in USD, rounded to the tenth: After choosing the leagues, we calculated the sum of points of the leagues in each country. This allowed us to have a ranking of the countries with the largest fan bases. Although these 64 leagues only concern 11 sports (American football, baseball, basketball, football, ice hockey, auto racing, cricket, Australian rules football, rugby union, rugby league, and handball), this gives a general idea of the countries’ citizens’ enthusiasm to follow sport events. Table 6.6 will show the top 20 countries with their total number of points: To study the impact of participation on a fan base, we have calculated the percentage of sports in which these countries have appeared in the six editions of the WRCES: 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019. We have then done an average between those six editions. The result obtained was 80%. This shows that there is a very strong correlation between mass participation and fan base. There is also a strong correlation between participation, fan base, and results. Indeed, as we saw in part 1 of Chapter 6, the WRCES top countries have an average level of participation of 84%. Likewise, countries with a large fan base are very successful. As a matter of fact, 18 of the 20 countries (90%) in Table 6.6 were ranked at least once in the top 20 of the six editions of the WRCES. In addition, 15 of them (75%) were always ranked in the top 20. This gives weight to Nassif’s suggestion (2020, p. 181) that participation improves both fan base and sport results, as explained in Fig. 6.1:

11.4

1. National Football League (NFL), American football, USA 2. Major League Baseball (MLB), baseball USA and Canadaa

22. India Premier League (IPL), Cricket, India 23. K. League, football, SK

6.0

4.5

4. English Premier League (EPL), football, GB 5. National Hockey League (NHL), ice hockey, USA and Canadac 6. La Liga, football, Spain 7. Bundesliga, football, Germany

4.0

4.6

19. National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing (NASCAR) Cup Series, Auto racing, USA 20. Turkish Super League (TSL), football, Turkey 21. Chinese Basketball Association (CBA), basketball, China

7.7

17. Russian Premier League (RPL), football, Russia 18. 2.Bundesliga, football, Germany

League

3. National Basketball Association (NBA), basketball, USA and Canadab

9.8

USD*

0.5

0.5

0.6

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.8

USD*

38. Swiss Super League, football, Switzerland 39. Ligue 2, football, France

36. Saudi Professional League (SPL), football, Saudi Arabia 37. Premiership Rugby, rugby union, GB

34. National Rugby League (NRL), Australia and New Zealand, Rugby unionf 35. J2 League, football, Japan

33. La Liga2, football, Spain

League

List of the wealthiest national professional sport leagues

League

Table 6.5

0.2

0.2

0.3

0.3

0.3

0.3

0.3

USD*

54. BBL, basketball, Germany 55. Serie C, football, Italy

53. DEL, Ice hockey, Germany

52. 3.Liga, football, Germany

51. Allsvenskan, football, Sweden

50. Eliteserien, football, Norway

49. Ekstraklasa, football, Poland

League

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.2

USD*

126 N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

29. Korean Baseball Organization (KBO), baseball, SK

1.2

0.9

11. Japanese Baseball League (NPB), baseball, Japan 12. Major League Soccer (MLS), football, USA and Canadad 13. Chinese Super League (CSL), football, China

1.0

26. Liga Profesional de Futbol, football Argentina 27. Australian Football League (AFL), Australian rules football, Australia 28. Primeira Liga, football, Portugal

24. Liga MX, football, Mexico 25. Eredivise, football, Netherlands

League

1.3

2.5

3.1

USD*

10. Brasileirão, football, Brazil

8. Serie A, football, Italy 9. Ligue 1, football, France

League

0.4

0.4

0.5

0.5

0.5

0.5

USD*

44. Austrian Football Bundesliga, football, Austria 45. Categoria Primera A, football, Colombia

40. Scottish Premiership, football, GB 41. Canadian Football League (CFL), American football, Canada 42. Swedish Hockey League (SHL), ice hockey, Sweden 43. Danish Superliga, football, Denmark

League

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

USD*

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

USD*

(continued)

60. Chilean Primera Division, football, Chile 61. South African Premier Division, South Africa, football

59. Liiga, Ice hockey, Finland

56. Pro D2, rugby union, France 57. Kazakhstan Premier League, football, Kazakhstan 58. Superleague, football, Greece

League

6 EXPERTISE OF THE NSGBS, NOCS, NSFS, AND SAS …

127

32. Top 14, rugby union, France

0.8

0.8

15. English Football League (EFL), football, GB 16. Kontinental Hockey League (KHL), ice hockey, Belarus, China, Finland, Kazakhstan, Latvia and Russia)e 0.3

0.4

0.4

USD*

48. B. League, basketball, Japan

46. English Football League One, football, GB 47. National League, Ice hockey, Switzerland

League

0.2

0.2

0.2

USD* 62. Israeli Premier League, football, Israel 63. English Football League Two, football, GB 64. HBL, Handball, Germany

League

0.1

0.1

0.1

USD*

and Latvia, which will get 2.4% each f Since 15 of the 16 teams are from Australia, Australia will get 94% of the points and New Zealand 6%

* Revenue in billion USD a Since 29 of the 30 teams of the MLB are from the USA, 97% of the points will go for the USA and 3% for Canada b Since 29 of the 30 teams of the NBA are from the USA, 97% of the points will go for the USA and 3% for Canada c Since 24 of the 31 teams are from the USA and seven from Canada, 77% of the points will go for the USA and 23% for Canada d Since 23 of the 26 teams are from the USA and three from Canada, 88% of the points will go for the USA and 12% for Canada e Since 18 of the 23 teams are from Russia, Russia will get 78% of the points. The other 12% will be split between Belarus, China, Finland, Kazakhstan,

30. Belgian First Division A, football, Belgium 31. Serie B (Italy), football, Italy

League

0.9

USD*

(continued)

14. J. League (Japan), football, Japan

League

Table 6.5

128 N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

6

Table 6.6 Top 20 countries in terms of fan base for the years 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019

EXPERTISE OF THE NSGBS, NOCS, NSFS, AND SAS …

Rank

Countries

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

USA Great Britain Germany Spain Italy France Japan Canada China Russia Brazil South Korea Australia Turkey Argentina India Mexico Netherlands Belgium Portugal

129

Total number of points 33.5 7.6 5.1 4.8 3.6 3.1 2.6 1.9 1.5 1.4 1.3 0.9 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4

Larger pool of talent

High level of participation

Better sport results

Funding of athletes

Larger fan base Interest of the media and the private sector

Fig. 6.1 Correlation between participation, fan base, and results

130

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

The media and private sector are, therefore, alongside the citizens and public actors, essential stakeholders of a country’s elite sport policy. They can give an additional funding for the SAs, NSFs, NOCs, and/or the NSGBs to surround the athletes with the best conditions to succeed. This phenomenon frequently occurs in the USA. A large fan base of people who are passionate about sport will attract massive revenues from the media and private sponsors, which are the major funders of elite sport in the USA. Indeed, professional sports in the United States are organized in closed leagues of competing franchises (Van Bottenburg, 2013). Moreover, the USOC, the world’s most successful NOC, does not receive funding from the government for its Olympic program. It functions mainly from sponsorship and citizens’ donations (USOC, 2020). Developing participation is a key to attract funds from the media and private sector. However, in practice, this equation is not as simple. Increasing participation must be accompanied by the efforts and expertise of the SAs, NSFs, NOCs, and/or NSGBs to attract the media and private sector. This is why the subjects of sport marketing, event management, and sport and the media are taught in all the sport management programs around the world (Hoye & Parent, 2016). The more the SAs, NSFs, NOCs, and NSGBs are directly involved in elite sport, the higher the countries’ chances to succeed. The role of SAs that have an elite sport structure, which we will call elite SAs, is very crucial for the improvement of elite sport. In sports like football (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2020; ESPN, 2020; “La Repubblica”, 2020; MLS, 2020; The Telegraph, 2020), basketball (ESPN, 2020), baseball (factmonster, 2020), American football (Professional Football Researchers Association, 2020), and ice hockey (McFarlane, 1997), top athletes are professionals playing for elite SAs or franchises as they are called in NA. These SAs offer salaries to their staff, provide elite training facilities, and have youth teams and talent identification systems. In part 2 of this chapter, we have talked about LFC’s youth system. We will now give facts about their senior team: • In 2019, it had a head coach, whom salary is 6 million USD a year (Net Worth Post, 2020), three assistant coaches, a goalkeeper coach, a goalkeeper coach assistant, a head of fitness and conditioning, a head of medical services, a medical rehabilitation and performance manager, a fitness coach, a masseur, a kit management coordinator, a kit manager coordinator, a strength and rehabilitation assistant, a

6

• • •

•

EXPERTISE OF THE NSGBS, NOCS, NSFS, AND SAS …

131

head of nutrition, a post-match analyst, two opposition analysts, and four physiotherapists (LFC, 2019). For the season 2017–2018, the players Fabinho Tavares, Virgil Van Dijk, and Mohamed Salah earned respectively annual salaries of 8.9 million USD, 11.3 million USD, and 13.7 million USD. The owner of the club is Fenway Sports Group which is constituted of seven directors: one principal owner, one chairman, one chief executive officer, and four other directors (LFC, 2020). In 2019, it had the following commercial partners: one main sponsor, one kit supplier, one official shirt sleeve sponsor, one official training kit sponsor, 18 other official partners, and two other event partners (LFC, 2020). In 2019, it had a customer services department (LFC, 2020), stadium services (LFC, 2020), six official stores in Great Britain and three other oversees.

LFC is very relevant to how much an elite SA has an impact on countries’ performances in elite sport. Indeed, 26 of the 33 players (almost 80%) of the 2018–2019 LFC first team squad (LFC, 2020) are players of successful national teams like Belgium, Brazil, Croatia, England, Portugal, Switzerland, and Spain, respectively ranked 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, and 9th in the 2018 FIFA Ranking (FIFA, 2018). Elite SAs are not only made of professional clubs or franchises. In the USA, universities do not only play the role of improving the skills of the athletes’ entourage. Indeed, the varsity teams of these universities are elite SAs that offer scholarships for elite athletes scouted from high schools. The amount of these scholarships varies depending on the sports and the athletes’ skills. Universities play a central role in the USA’s success in sport (number one in the 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2021 editions of the WRCES). They represent the places where the highest majority of American elite athletes are trained and prepared through the widely popular college competitions (“Collegemarketinggroup”, 2016). The National College Athletic Association (NCAA), most prominent university league in the USA, had generated 868 million USD in 2019 (Statista, 2020). However, on a global scale, the universities’ main role is to develop and improve the skills of the athletes’ entourage at a grassroots, youth, and elite levels. As a matter of fact, the agents that constitute this entourage are almost the same at the different levels of the sport pyramid: coaches, managers, medical staff, and referees.

132

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

Elite SAs can also be the sport teams of the armies. In South Korea (9th in the 2014 WRCES, 10th in 2015, 9th in 2016, 11th in 2017, 11th in 2018, and 13th in 2019), the army has a primary role in the training of elite athletes (Hong, 2012). NSFs also have a direct and predominant role in elite sport. Apart from organizing all the competitions in the country, they select the athletes who will constitute the national teams which will compete in the international competitions of their sports. If they have the sufficient financial and human resources like the French Football Federation (France was ranked second in the 2018 and 2019 FIFA men football rankings), they will be in a position to implement a system of talent identification and provide facilities to train the athletes (French Football Federation, 2020). NSFs are also the principal players in the hosting of international events, which they sometimes do in coordination and with the help of the NSGBs and NOCs (Nassif, 2010, p. 135). The support of the former mainly takes place when countries organize regional and/or Olympic Games (De Bosscher et al., 2015, p. 311). As we saw in Chapter 2, according to De Bosscher et al., hosting international events is one of the nine pillars of success (De Bosscher et al., 2015, p. 354). Johnson and Ali (2000) also advocate this idea. We have tried to measure the impact of hosting sports events on countries’ results in elite sport. For this matter, we used the Global Sports Impact (GSI) Nations Index created by Sportcal (Sportcal, 2020) company, trusted by entities like Manchester United (MU), the NBA, and Formula 1 for being a world reference in terms of sport market intelligence. The GSI Nations Index conducts a detailed analysis on around 700 major multisport games and world championships over a rolling 14-year period, covering seven years in the past and seven years in the future. It has chosen to use this time-span because it allows to consider events of a minimum of three Olympic cycles. More than 80 sports are considered in this ranking, which include the sports that are part of the Olympic program and those recognized by the IOC. The GSI Nations Index’ objective is to identify which nations are bidding for and winning the right to host global sport events. Those are weighted according to their sizes, scale, and impact, which were calculated based on the following components: “Economy and Tourism”, “Media and Sponsorship”, “Social and Sustainability”, and “Sporting”. For example, in 2018, the FIFA World Cup and Olympic Winter Games were the events that gathered the highest number of points. The GSI Nations Index is

6

EXPERTISE OF THE NSGBS, NOCS, NSFS, AND SAS …

133

then calculated by summing the points of all the events a country has hosted within the 14-year period span. To study if hosting an event has an impact on countries’ performance in elite sport, we have compared the top 20 of the GSI Nations Index updated in April 2019 with the top 20 of the 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 WRCES editions. We could not conduct a full correlation between those two rankings because the GSI Nations Index only listed 90 countries by opposition to the WRCES which considers 2016. The April 2019 update, last version to date, was chosen because it proposes an analyzed period which goes from 2013 to 2026. This time span allows to see if the countries that organized sport events between 2013 and 2019 were successful in the six editions of the WRCES (which happened almost in the same years), and then if those successful countries of the WRCES are aiming to host events in the years to come. We have found that 75% of the countries ranked in the top 20 of the 2014, 2015, 2017, 2018, and 2019 WRCES editions were also listed in the top 20 of the April 2019 GSI Nations Index. For the 2016 edition, 80% of the WRCES top 20 were also ranked in the GSI Nations Index. In the six editions, all the WRCES top 10 were ranked in the GSI Nations Index top 20. This shows that hosting major events has a high impact on a country’s performance in elite sport. The work done by the NSFs with the backing of the NSGBs and NOCs is, therefore, a determinant of success. In some countries, NSGBs and NOCs can also be in charge of training the athletes. In WRCES’ leading countries like France, Japan, and Australia, NSGBs provide the facilities for many of their elite athletes to prepare themselves for international competitions. In other sport powerhouses, such as the USA, Germany, the Netherlands, and Brazil, NOCs are also in charge of training some of their athletes (ASPC, 2020). As we saw in Table 2.3 of Chapter 2, the main roles of the NSGBs and NOCs when it comes to sport are related to policymaking. In elite sport, this often translates into the prioritization of the sports where countries have the highest chances of success. For Reiche, this is the core of the winning formula. In the WISE model, three of the four components he has identified are directly related to sports prioritization: • Women: For Reiche, developing women elite sport will strongly enhance a country’s potential to win medals considering that there

134

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

are less women than men competitors around the world (Reiche, 2016, p. 90). This requires the NSGBs and the NOCs to have a strategy to identify sports where their women athletes have more chances to succeed. • Specialization: For Reiche, focusing on sports that offer higher chances to win medals is a very commonly used method for countries to achieve success (Reiche, 2016, p. 108). As with women, the NSGBs and NOCs must undertake identification strategies for sports that their countries can specialize in so as to succeed. • Early learning: Reiche considers that learning sports that are newly added to the Olympic program before other countries will give an advantage in the race for trophies (Reiche, 2016, p. 126). This also joins the scope of identification of sports where a country can have an advantage. De Bosscher et al. (2019) have also analyzed the importance of prioritization. According to them, prioritized sports are those that beneficiate from a funding advantage from the NOCs and/or NSGBs. However, they excluded the “investments by municipalities, the police, the military, state companies, and private donors”. For this reason, we believe that although sports prioritization by the NOCs and/or NSGBs should be considered as one of the meso-level strategies leading to success, its impact is limited because other athletes not beneficiating from these advantages can have very large resources allowing them to train full time for their sports. In fact, if we take the 100 richest athletes in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019, for example, we will find that they are all funded by SAs salaries, endorsements, and/or competitions purses (forbes, 2020). We also do not believe in the predominance of the NOCs and/or NSGBs’ prioritization of sports because they are considered in view of the funding of athletes who have the highest chances to win medals in the Olympics and our analysis is based on the WRCES, therefore on all the countries’ performances in a much wider number of sports. Implementing an elite sport policy is very complex. It is very difficult to identify a model on how it is formally achieved considering the differences between countries in terms of social, economic, and political backgrounds. This chapter aimed to present an account on the expertise needed by the different stakeholders of the national sport movement to undertake the necessary actions at grassroots, youth, and elite levels in

6

EXPERTISE OF THE NSGBS, NOCS, NSFS, AND SAS …

135

order to achieve success in international competitions. We have identified four major measures that needed to be taken in consideration: First, the development of mass participation; second, the organization of grassroots and youth competitions; third, the improvement of the skills of the athletes’ entourage; and fourth, the setting up of an environment that will optimize success at the elite level. For these four measures to succeed, the stakeholders of the national sport movement must take the following actions: 1. SAs: At grassroots and youth level

• Develop the athletes by training and making them compete • Provide financial support for the coaches • Lobby to receive funding from the public and/or private sectors

At the elite level

• Provide the optimal conditions allowing the elite athletes to consecrate a large amount of time for training and competition • Provide financial support for the elite coaches • Provide financial support for the elite athletes • Implement a talent identification system • Conduct marketing to receive media attention • Lobby to receive funding from the public and/or private sectors

2. NSFs:

• • • •

Set the rules and regulations for the SAs affiliations Develop the skills of coaches and referees. Organize competitions for the different age and gender categories Implement a talent identification system

136

• • • • • •

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

Provide training facilities for the elite athletes Provide financial support for the elite athletes Provide financial support for the elite coaches Conduct marketing to receive media attention Lobby to receive funding from the public and/or private sectors Host international competitions

3. NOCs:

• • • • • • • • • •

Represent their countries in regional and Olympic Games Lead in the implementation of a national sport policy Develop the managers’ skills Choose the sports to fund Provide training facilities for the elite athletes Provide financial support for the elite athletes Provide financial support for the elite coaches Conduct marketing to receive media attention Lobby to receive funding from the public and/or private sectors Host international competitions

4. NSGBs:

• • • • • • • • •

Lead in the implementation of a national sport policy Develop the skills of the coaches Choose the sports to fund Provide training facilities for elite athletes Provide financial support for elite athletes Provide financial support for elite coaches Conduct marketing to receive media attention Lobby to receive funding from the public and/or private sectors Host international competitions

6

EXPERTISE OF THE NSGBS, NOCS, NSFS, AND SAS …

137

5. Universities:

• Develop scientific research that is indispensable to develop elite sport’s standards • Develop the skills of coaches, managers, and PES teachers

6. Schools:

• Develop the physical abilities of all students • Develop the PES teachers’ skills The actions we have listed are certainly not undertaken in all countries. However, the more these six stakeholders have the expertise to carry them out, the more successful the countries in elite sport. Figure 6.2 will explain how these actions are spread in the national sport pyramid. Figure 6.2 shows that schools have an impact on the grassroots and youth levels. We placed the NSFs, SAs, and universities in the middle of the pyramid around an up-down arrow because their actions improve the standards at all the levels of the pyramid. NSGBs and NOCs’ main tasks are at the elite level. However, the policies they implement have a top-down effect. For this reason, we drew two top-down arrows at the top of the pyramid. The expertise needed by these six stakeholders is the “last link of the chain” of the factors leading to countries’ performance in elite sport. They follow the other macro-factors which are geography, genetics, political interest, cultural interest, and wealth. The political and cultural interests will generate the funding which is highly dependent on a country’s wealth. This funding is strongly needed by the NSGBs, NOCs, NSFs, and SAs to coordinate the necessary actions at meso-level, and transparency is required to optimize their success. The work of these four stakeholders will attract the media and private sector interests, which will add more revenues to the national sport movement. As we saw in Fig. 6.2, schools and universities will complete the actions taken by the NSGBs, NOCs, NSFs, and SAs. Success will recreate the interest of public actors, citizens, media, and private investors,

138

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

ELITE

NSGBS - Lead in the implementation of a national sport policy - Develop the coaches’ skills - Choose the sports to fund - Provide financial support and training facilities for elite coaches and athletes - Conduct marketing to receive media attention - Lobby to receive funding from the public and/or private sectors - Host international competitions

NOCs - Represent their countries in regional and Olympic Games - Lead in the implementation of a national sport policy - Develop the managers’ skills - Choose the sports to fund - Provide financial support and training facilities for elite coaches and athletes - Conduct marketing to receive media attention - Lobby to receive funding from the public and/or private sectors - Host international competitions

NSFs - Provide financial support and training facilities for the elite athletes and coaches - Conduct marketing to receive media attention - Lobby to receive funding from the public and/or private sectors - Host international competitions - Implement a talent identification system - Set the rules and regulations for the SAs affiliations - Develop the skills of the coaches and referees. - Organize competitions for the different age and gender categories

YOUTH

GRASSROOTS

Universities -Develop the scientific research that is indispensable to develop elite sport’s standards - Develop the skills of the coaches, managers, and PES teachers

SAs At the elite level - Provide the optimal conditions to allow elite athletes to consecrate a large amount of time for training and competition - Provide financial support for the elite coaches and athletes - Provide financial support for the elite athletes - Implement a talent identification system - Conduct marketing to receive media attention - Lobby to receive funding from the public and/or private sectors At grassroots and youth levels - Develop the athletes by training and making them compete - Develop the skills of the coaches - Provide financial support for the coaches - Lobby to receive funding from the public and/or private sectors

Schools -Develop the physical abilities of the students - Develop the skills of the PES teachers

Fig. 6.2 Actions required from the stakeholders of the national sport movement

which will regenerate this spiral of success. Our model will be named GGIFTE, which stands for Geography, Genetics, Interest (of the public actors, citizens, media, and private sector), Funding Transparency, and Expertise (of the different stakeholders of the national sport movement). Figure 6.3 will show the mechanism of the GGIFTE model, which is the outcome of our book:

6

EXPERTISE OF THE NSGBS, NOCS, NSFS, AND SAS …

139

a Geography/ Genetics Natural environment pre-requisite for the other macro, meso, and micro level factors

Interest of the public actors (government and local communities)

Interest of the citizens in participating, coaching, or organizing sport activities

Funding (in money and infrastructure) Depends largely on the wealth of the country Funding (through volunteering) Funding (in money)

Interest of media and private sector COUNTRIES’ SUCCESS IN ELITE SPORT

TRANSPARENCY

Expertise needed by the different stakeholders to implement coordinated policies to succeed in elite sport (See Figure 10.b)

Fig. 6.3 a. The GGIFTE model of countries’ success in elite sport. b. Expertise needed by the different stakeholders to implement coordinated policies to succeed in elite sport

140

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

b

ELITE

NSGBS

NOCs - Represent their countries in regional and Olympic Games - Lead in the implementation of a national sport policy - Develop the skills of the managers - Choose the sports to fund - Provide financial support and training facilities for elite coaches and athletes - Conduct marketing to receive media attention - Lobby to receive funding from the public and/or private sectors - Host international competitions

- Lead in the implementation of a national sport policy - Develop the skills of the coaches - Choose the sports to fund - Provide financial support and training facilities for elite coaches and athletes - Conduct marketing to receive media attention - Lobby to receive funding from the public and/or private sectors - Host international competitions

NSFs - Provide financial support and training facilities for the elite athletes and coaches - Conduct marketing to receive media attention - Lobby to receive funding from the public and/or private sectors - Host international competitions - Implement a talent identification system - Set the rules and regulations for the SAs affiliations - Develop the skills of the coaches and referees - Organize competitions for the different age and gender categories

YOUTH Universities -Develop scientific research that is indispensable to develop elite sport’s standards - Develop the skills of the coaches, managers, and PES teachers

GRASSROOTS

SAs At the elite level - Provide the optimal conditions to allow elite athletes to consecrate a large amount of time for training and competition - Provide financial support for the elite coaches and athletes - Provide financial support for the elite athletes - Implement a talent identification system - Conduct marketing to receive media attention - Lobby to receive funding from the public and/or private sectors At grassroots and youth levels - Develop the athletes by training and making them compete - Develop the skills of the coaches - Provide financial support for the coaches - Lobby to receive funding from the public and/or private sectors

Schools -Develop the physical abilities of the students - Develop the skills of the PES teachers

Fig. 6.3 (continued)

References Broad, E. M., Burke, L. M., Cox, G. R., Heeley, P., & Riley, M. (1996). Body weight changes and voluntary fluid intakes during training and competition sessions in team sports. International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism, 6(3), 307–320. Callède, J. P. (2002). Les politiques du sport en France. L’année Sociologique, 52(2), 437–457.

6

EXPERTISE OF THE NSGBS, NOCS, NSFS, AND SAS …

141

De Bosscher, V. (2008). The global sporting arms race: An international comparative study on sports policy factors leading to international sporting success. Meyer & Meyer Verlag. De Bosscher, V., Shibli, S., & Weber, A. C. (2019). Is prioritisation of funding in elite sport effective? An analysis of the investment strategies in 16 countries. European Sport Management Quarterly, 19(2), 221–243. 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. Meyer & Meyer Sport. Elliott, B., & Mester, H. (2000). Training in sport: applying sports science. John Wiley & Sons. FIFA. (2018). https://www.fifa.com/fifa-world-ranking/men?dateId=id14079 Retrieved in 2018. Hong, E. (2012). Applying a western-based policy community framework to the analysis of South Korean elite sport policy: The role of businesses and armed forces. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 4(1), 23–37. Hoye, R., & Parent, M. M. (Eds.). (2016). The SAGE handbook of sport management. Sage. International Council for Coaching Excellence and the Association of Summer Olympic International Federation. (2012). International sport coaching framework (version 1.1). Human Kinetics. Interview with Wissam Abi Nader, president and head coach of the Lebanese MMA SA “Tristar Lebanon”, July 2020 Johnson, D. K., & Ali, A. (2000). Coming to play or coming to win: Participation and success at the Olympic Games. Wellesley College Dept. of Economics Working Paper, (2000–10). Makhov, A. S., Stepanova, O. N., Shmeleva, S. V., Petrova, E. A., & Dubrovinskaya, E. I. (2015). Planning and organization of sports competitions for disabled people: Russian experience. Biosciences Biotechnology Research Asia, 12(1), 877–886. Martens, R. (1987). Coaches guide to sport psychology: A publication for the American coaching effectiveness program: Level 2 sport science curriculum. Human Kinetics Books. McFarlane, B. (1997). Brian McFarlane’s history of hockey. Sagamore Publishing. Miege, C. in the book written by Sobry, C. (Ed.). (2011). Sports governance in the world: A socio-historic approach; the organization of sport in Europe: A patch-work of institutions, with few shared points. Ed. Le Manuscrit. Montgomery, P. G., Pyne, D. B., & Minahan, C. L. (2010). The physical and physiological demands of basketball training and competition. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 5(1), 75–86.

142

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

Nassif, N. (2010). Sport policy in Lebanon, 1975 to 2004: Lebanese geopolitical background, Lebanese sport characteristics and difficulties plan for development. Lambert Academic Publishing GMBH & Co.KG. Nassif, N. “Physical education and sports in Lebanese Universities”, chapter of the book written by Bobrík, M., Antala, B., & Pˇelucha, R. (2020). Physical education in universities researches–Best practices–Situation. Fédération Internationale DÉducation Physique. Official website of Forbes magazine. https://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtba denhausen/2019/07/22/the-worlds-50-most-valuable-sports-teams-2019/# 579ddcad283d; https://www.forbes.com/athletes/#64c97a8a55ae Retrieved in June 2020. Official website of Liverpool Football Club. https://www.liverpoolfc.com/ team/academy; https://www.liverpoolfc.com/team/first-team; https:// www.liverpoolfc.com/corporate/directors; https://www.liverpoolfc.com/cor porate/partners; https://www.liverpoolfc.com/tickets/how-to-buy-tickets; https://www.liverpoolfc.com/fans/fan-experience/visiting-anfield; https:// www.liverpoolfc.com/team/first-team Retrieved in 2019. Official website of Liverpool Football Club. https://www.liverpoolfc.com/ team/academy; https://www.liverpoolfc.com/team/first-team; https:// www.liverpoolfc.com/corporate/directors; https://www.liverpoolfc.com/cor porate/partners; https://www.liverpoolfc.com/tickets/how-to-buy-tickets; https://www.liverpoolfc.com/fans/fan-experience/visiting-anfield; https:// www.liverpoolfc.com/team/first-team Retrieved in June 2020. Official website of the Association of Sport Performance Centers. https://sportp erformancecentres.org/#block-views-centre-s-content-block Retrieved in July 2020. Official website of the British Broadcasting Corporation. https://www.bbc.com/ sport/football/42130297 Retrieved in July 2020. Official website of the Entertainment and Sports Programming Network. http:/ /www.espn.com/espn/news/story?id=6354899 Retrieved in July 2020. Official website of the Executive Masters in Sport Organization Management. https://memos.degree/program/ Retrieved in July 2020. Official website of the French Football Federation. https://www.fff.fr/art icles/arbitrer/arbitrer-formation/formation-d-arbitre/details-articles/1470545686-sections-sportives-scolaires-a-filiere-arbitrage-perf-arbitrage; https:// www.fff.fr/actualites/1809-479674-les-conditions-dinscription?themePath= direction-technique-nationale/jouer/institut-national-du-football/ Retrieved in July 2020. Official website of the International Olympic Committee. https://www.oly mpic.org/entourage; https://www.olympic.org/olympic-solidarity-world-pro grammes Retrieved in June 2020.

6

EXPERTISE OF THE NSGBS, NOCS, NSFS, AND SAS …

143

Official website of the Major League Soccer. https://mlsplayers.org/resources/ salary-guide Retrieved in July 2020. Official website of the newspaper «La Repubblica». http://www.repubblica. it/2006/11/sezioni/sport/calcio/stipendi-calciatori/stipendi-calciatori/sti pendi-calciatori.html Retrieved in July 2020. Official website of the portal «Fact Monster». https://www.factmonster.com/ sports/baseball/baseball-america-history Retrieved in July 2020. Official website of the portal “Scimago”. http://www.scimagojr.com/aboutu s.php Retrieved in July 2020. Official website of the Professional Football Researchers Association. http:// www.profootballresearchers.org/coffin-corner.htm Retrieved in July 2020. Official website of the sport’s consultancy company «Sportcal». https://www. sportcal.com/GSI/GSINationsIndex Retrieved in July 2020. Official website of the Sport management hub ‘sportsmanagementdegreehub’. https://www.sportsmanagementdegreehub.com/olympic-athletessalaries/ Retrieved in July 2020. Official website of the statistic portal “Statista”. https://www.statista.com/statis tics/219605/ncaa-revenue-breakdown/#:~:text=The%20statistic%20shows% 20the%20revenue,and%20marketing%20rights%20fees%20segment. Retrieved in July 2020. Official website of «The Telegraph» magazine. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/ sport/football/competitions/serie-a/8719501/Samuel-Etoo-to-become-wor lds-highest-earning-footballer-if-he-passes-medical-with-Anzhi-Makhachkala. html Retrieved in July 2020. Official website of the United States Olympic Committee. https://www.teamusa. org/us-olympic-and-paralympic-foundation/about-the-foundation Retrieved in July 2020. Official website of the World Ranking of Countries in Elite Sport. www.worlds portranking.info Retrieved in 2020. Official website of the World Ranking of Countries in Elite Sport. www.worlds portranking.info Retrieved in January 2022. Reiche, D. (2016). Success and failure of countries at the Olympic Games. Routledge. Riordan, J. (1993). Rewriting soviet sports history. Journal of Sport History, 20(3), 247–258. Rosen, S. (1972). Learning and experience in the labor market. Journal of Human Resources, 326–342. The website of the academic orientation portal «Orientation-Education». https:/ /www.orientation-education.com/article/bees Retrieved in July 2020 The website of the «Collegemarketinggroup» portal. https://collegemarketin ggroup.com/blog/which-universities-have-produced-the-most-olympians/ Retrieved in July 2020.

144

N. NASSIF AND M. RASPAUD

The website of the “Net Worth Post” portal. https://networthpost.org/jurgenklopp-net-worth/ Retrieved in July 2020. Van Bottenburg, M. (2013). Why are the European and American sports worlds so different? Path dependence in European and American sports history. In Sport and the transformation of modern Europe (pp. 217–237). Routledge. Zheng, J., Lau, P. W. C., Chen, S., Dickson, G., De Bosscher, V., & Peng, Q. (2019). Interorganisational conflict between national and provincial sport organisations within China’s elite sport system: Perspectives from national organisations. Sport Management Review, 22(5), 667–681.

Conclusion

This book did not explore whether achieving results in international competitions is beneficial for a country’s sustainable development and social well-being. Its objective was to focus on the factors and strategies that could generally lead to success. The aim was to show that success in sport is achieved through a complex equation including an ensemble of geographic, biometric, political, economic, and cultural factors mixed with the transparency and expertise of the different stakeholders of the sport movement at the meso- and micro-levels: the government, local communities, citizens, private sector, media, NSGBs, NOCs, NSFs, SAs, universities, schools, sport managers, coaches, officials, researchers, medical staff, and the final executants: the athletes. Winning in sport is achieved through the implementation of what Josep Escoda, General Secretary of the ASPC, calls “sport ecosystem” (Escoda, 2018). This book aimed to propose a model that gives an overview of this ecosystem. After undertaking correlations calculi between the WRCES, population, GDP, area’s size, and research rankings for six consecutive years, we have found that the first natural pre-requisites that lead to success are geography and genetics. Indeed, the geographical factor could not be altered in sports requiring snow. As for genetics, we have found that they have a significant impact on strength-related sports. Any policy targeting success in elite sport must, therefore, first consider each country’s geographic and biometric conditions. Once these are adequately analyzed, the public actors, government, and local communities must © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 N. Nassif and M. Raspaud, National Success in Elite Sport, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38997-9

145

146

CONCLUSION

implement a top-down policy, which is crucial to stimulate the citizens’ interest in engaging in sport. The resulting bottom-up actions taken by the citizens will develop a sport culture that will attract media agents and private companies. Those two major stakeholders can then increase the funding poured by the public actors and citizens in the sport structure. The size of this funding is highly dependent on the wealth of each country, which is one of the most important factors leading to success. Indeed, the correlation between the GDP and the WRCES was constantly above 0.7 for six consecutive years. The efficiency of wealth, and consequently funding, will increase if the country demonstrates a high level of transparency and expertise. Transparency will prevent the embezzlement of funds and allow for good governance, which are both necessary for the stakeholders at a meso-level, NSGBs, NOCs, NSFs and SAs, in order to implement coordinated actions (developing mass participation, organizing competitions, improving the athletes’ entourage’s skills, and creating an optimal environment for the athletes) that will allow the micro-level actors (athletes, coaches, managers, medical staff, PES teachers, referees) to improve their performances. In order to succeed, those strategies undertaken at meso- and micro-levels must benefit from a high level of scientific advancement. It is indeed impossible for a country to succeed in sport without developed scientific knowledge. Among all factors, research output actually has the strongest correlation with sport results: an average of 0.8 between 2014 and 2019. Although it identified the factors needed for success, this work cannot give a complete answer to the complex question of what it takes for countries to win in sport. Accordingly, many problems and questions need to be explored, such as: – What socio-cultural factors led to the development of a sport culture in a country more than another? – What meso-level strategies could be used by the NSGBs, NOCs, NSAs, and SAs to attract the public actors, participants, fans, private investors, and media to invest in the sport movement? – What meso-level strategies should be implemented to develop good governance in the NSGBs, NOCs, NSAs, and SAs? – What sport-related subjects should universities invest more in so as to develop performance at a micro-level? – What are the best systems of talent identification? Should they consider sport talent as well as the psycho-sociological background?

CONCLUSION

147

– What are the most appropriate strategies to develop dual career programs? Are they the salaries, scholarships, or employment opportunities? – What are the most appropriate programs to develop the skills of coaches, managers, officials, and physical educators? – Based on its population biometric characteristics, in which sports must a country invest? What are the body types and physiological attributes required for the different sports? This book, therefore, did not present a “magical portion recipe” for countries aiming to succeed on the international sport scene, but it aspired to open the door for pertinent reflections and international coordinated research aimed at raising awareness on the factors and strategies that could be implemented by countries to improve their results in elite sport.

Reference

In discussion with Josep Escoda, General Secretary of the ASPC, September 2018

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 N. Nassif and M. Raspaud, National Success in Elite Sport, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38997-9

149

Index

A Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF), 54 Association of Sport Performance Centers (ASPC), 27 Association of Summer Olympic International Federations (ASOIF), 120, 121 Association of Tennis Professionals (ATP), 5, 26, 51 Association Sportive des Employés de Commerce (ASEC), 86 Australian Football League (AFL), 127 Australian Institute of Sport (AIS), 39 Australian Ladies Professional Golf (ALPG), 26 Australian Sports Commission (ASC), 39

B Badminton World Federation (BWF), 24

Basketball German League (BBL), 126 Bicycle Motocross (BMX), 14, 18

C Cables News Network (CNN), 124 Canadian Football League (CFL), 127 Chinese Basketball Association (CBA), 126 Chinese National Games (CNG), 57 Chinese Super League (CSL), 127 Committee of the International Children’s Games (CICG), 16, 17 Congo Democratic Republic (CDR), 78–82

E English Football League (EFL), 128 English Premier League (EPL), 126 Entertainment and Sports Programming Network (ESPN), 26, 130

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 N. Nassif and M. Raspaud, National Success in Elite Sport, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38997-9

151

152

INDEX

Ernst & Young (EY), 124 European Union (EU), 27, 56, 57 Executive Masters in Sport Organization Management (MEMOS), 121

F French Center for Sport Excellence (INSEP), 28

G Geography, Genetics, Interest, Funding, Transparency and Expertise (GGIFTE), 138, 139 German Ice Hockey League (DEL), 126 Global Association of International Sports Federations (GAISF), 2, 6, 7, 9, 85 Global Sports Impact (GSI), 132, 133 Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), 102 Gross Domestic Product (GDP), vii, 19, 20, 40, 41, 70, 72–74, 78, 90, 92, 93, 95, 96, 108, 117, 118, 145, 146 Group of 7 (G7), 35

H Handball German League (HBL), 128 Havas Sports & Entertainment (HSE), 2, 6–8

I Indian Premier League (IPL), 126 International Basketball Federation (FIBA), 9, 24, 106 International Committee of Sports for the Deaf (CISS), 16, 17

International Council for Coaching Excellence (ICCE), 120, 121 International Federation (IF), 6, 7, 9, 18, 24–26, 121, 123 International Fencing Federation (FIE), 24 International Football Federation (FIFA), 3, 25, 27, 35, 106, 131, 132 International Golf Federation (IGF), 26, 106 International Hockey Federation (FIH), 24, 25 International Judo Federation (IJF), 25 International Masters Games Association (IMGA), 16, 17 International Military Sports Council (CISM), 16, 17 International Olympic Committee (IOC), 3, 5–7, 16, 42, 71, 107, 119, 121, 123, 132 International Paralympic Committee (IPC), 27 International Police Sport Union (USIP), 16–18 International School Federation (ISF), 15–17, 122 International Society for Sports Sciences in the Arab World (I3SAW), 10 International Table Tennis Federation (ITTF), 25 International Tennis Federation (ITF), 26 International University Sports Federation (FISU), 16, 17 International Workers and Amateurs in Sports Confederation (CSIT), 16, 17 Italian National Olympic Committee (CONI), 57

INDEX

J Japanese Baseball League (NPB), 127

K Kontinental Hockey League (KHL), 128 Korea Ladies Professional Golf Association (KLPGA), 26 Korean Baseball Organization (KBO), 127

L Ladies European Tour (LET), 26 Ladies Professional Golf Association (LPGA), 26 Ladies Professional Golfers Association of Japan (JLPGA), 26 Lebanese Ministry of Youth and Sports (LMYS), 95, 108, 109 Lebanese Olympic Committee (LOC), 95, 108, 109 Liverpool Football Club (LFC), 116, 117, 119, 130, 131

M Major League Baseball (MLB), 19, 126, 128 Major League Soccer (MLS), 127, 130 Manchester United (MU), 132

N Nanyang Technological University (NTU), 35 National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), 102 National Basketball Association (NBA), 19, 51, 126, 128, 132

153

National College Athletic Association (NCAA), 51, 131 National Football League (NFL), 19, 126 National Hockey League (NHL), 19, 126 National Olympic Committee (NOC), 2, 3, 5, 9, 11, 27, 34, 53, 55–58, 70, 80, 81, 107, 108, 110, 113, 121, 123, 124, 130, 133, 134, 137, 146 National Rugby League (NRL), 126 National Sport Federation (NSF), 34, 38, 41, 53, 55, 56, 95, 106–110, 113–115, 117, 119–121, 123, 124, 130, 132, 133, 137, 146 National Sport Governing Body (NSGB), 53, 107, 108, 110, 113, 114, 121, 123, 124, 130, 132–134, 137, 146 National Sports Governance Observer (NSGO), 109 Non-Governmental Organization (NGO), 36, 109

O Official World Golf Ranking (OWGR), 25

P Physical Education and Sports (PES), 57, 108, 117, 119–121, 123, 137, 146

R Royal and Ancient Golf Club of Saint Andrews (R&A), 25, 106 Russian Premier League (RPL), 126

154

INDEX

S Saudi Professional League (SPL), 126 Special Olympics (SO), 16, 17 Sport Association (SA), 49, 105–109, 113–115, 117, 119, 120, 124, 130, 131, 135, 137, 146 Sport Policies Leading to International Sport Success (SPLISS), 58–60 Sweden Hockey League (SHL), 127 T Turkish Super League (TSL), 126 U United Arab Emirates (UAE), 102 United Kingdom (UK), 2, 3, 28, 53, 54 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), 35 United States of America (USA), 13, 22, 23, 35, 45, 53, 78, 80, 81, 85, 89, 90, 96, 103, 105, 126, 128–131

United States Olympic Committee (USOC), 28, 130 W Western Europe (WE), 105 Women, Institutionalization, Specialization and Early learning (WISE), 60, 133 Women Tennis Association (WTA), 5, 26 World Archery (WA), 24 World Boxing Council (WBC), 84 World Ranking of Countries in Elite Sport (WRCES), vi, vii, 2, 10, 11, 17, 20, 21, 23–29, 41, 62, 69–74, 78–82, 85–89, 91–93, 95, 96, 105, 114, 118, 119, 121, 122, 125, 132, 133, 145 World Sporting Index (WSI), 3, 4, 6 World Transplant Games Federation (WTGF), 16, 17 Y Young Men’s Christian Association (YMCA), 106