The Amateur Initiative
Mikki Sistermans (10183736)
mikkisistermans@gmail.com
Supervisor: Dr. Luc Franssen
Second reader: Dr. Robin Pistorius
18-8-2016 (Revised version)
University of Amsterdam
Master thesis Political Science (International Relations)
Research project: Transnational Politics of Sustainability
1 Table of contents 1. Introduction 3 2. Methodology 8 2.1 Approach 8 2.2 Case selection 9
2.3 Policy document analysis 11
2.4 Reliability and validity 11
3. Sustainability 14
3.1 General overview 14
3.2 Global sustainable development 16
3.2.1 State-led global sustainable development 16 3.2.2 Non-state actor global sustainable development 17
3.3 Local sustainable development 18
3.4 Sustainability in sports 19
3.5 Local amateur sports clubs and sustainability 21
4. Who governs sports? 23
4.1 History of Dutch national sports governance 23 4.2 Current situation in Dutch sports governance 24 5. Background: international sports governance 27 5.1 International sports governance autonomy 27
5.2 International autonomy wanes 28
6. Findings and analysis 30
6.1 Sports governance organizations 30 6.1.1 Publicly available documents and webpages 30 6.1.2 Content of publicly available documents and webpages 30 6.2 Sports governance representatives 31
6.2.1 KNVB 31
6.3 Amateur sports clubs 33
6.3.1 Ecological sustainability 33
6.3.2 Social sustainability 35
7. Discussion 38
2
Appendix A – Digital sources 44
Appendix B – Respondent list 45
Appendix C – Questionnaire sustainability 46
3 1. Introduction
When thinking about the subject of sustainability one generally thinks about development in third world countries or saving the rain forests of South America, but it rarely happens that thought is being given to sustainability in the combination with sport. However, sport does play a part in the daily lives of many people around the world. Be it through practicing a sport themselves or following a professional sports league or tournament, people connect with the world of sport on a daily basis. Luckily, the sports world itself does recognize the growing importance of sustainable development of sport as for example shown by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) when it adopted the environment as its third pillar next to sport and culture (Schmidt, 2006; Chappelet, 2008). The concept of sustainability however, is framed around much more than just the natural environment of the earth. As first defined by the Brundtland Commission in 1987 sustainability or sustainable
development is “development that meets the need of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” (World Commission on
Environment and Development, 1987: 36). This definition does not speak of environmental development, but of development. More specifically, development that will not compromise future generations and that will allow them to live their lives on equal or perhaps even better than our current terms. When thinking about the way we live we do not just think of the environment, we also think about aspects such as society and the economy as they have just as much, or perhaps even more impact on our lives than the environment we live in. Indeed, the environment, social world and economy are recognized as the three pillars of sustainable development (Strange and Bayley, 2008).
The IOC has since moved on to a more inclusive concept of sustainability, that is a conception of sustainability that not just takes into account the environment, but recognizes that the environment, social world and to a lesser extent the economy are intertwined and are equally important. This can be seen by, for example the inclusion of both an
environmental and social dimension in the Sustainability Management Plan: Rio 2016 Olympic and Paralympic Games (2013). But in a lot of ways the academic sports literature and most sports federations and clubs associate the concept of sustainability primarily with the environment. Because of this it appears that the debate on sustainability and sports is dominated by the environmental aspect of sustainability while other aspects are largely ignored. This has impacted the way sports governance organizations think about
4
sustainability and how they communicate about sustainability within their respective sports and towards the sports organizations that are aligned to them.
Take for example the Dutch national football association KNVB and the national korfball association KNVK. Both associations recognize that sustainability is a broad concept that touches upon multiple themes including environment and social responsibility.
However, their more practical explanation of the use of sustainability for clubs focuses mainly on the ability to cut down costs on energy use. Both also refer to a subsidy
arrangement from the Dutch government which allows for clubs to gain financial support for sustainability projects (KNKV, 2016; KNVB, 2016). This implies that sustainability is framed as a concept that can help Dutch sports clubs to spend less money on certain areas of expenses like energy.
There are however, different ways of framing sustainability and the United Nations (UN) for one recognize sports as “an important enable of sustainable development in its promotion of tolerance and respect and the contributions it makes to the empowerment of women and of young people, individuals and communities as well as to health, education and social inclusion objectives.” (United Nations, 2016). This definition implies less focus on the environmental aspect and more on the social aspect, taking another route compared to Dutch sports associations. This specific way of framing sustainability by the UN is supported by for example Girginov and Hills, who explain “a perception, and a collective endeavour, which reflects specific visions about the purpose of human life, time, progress and social change.” (Girginov and Hills, 2009: 165) as sustainable sports development. The latter explanation of sustainability implies a much more socially engaged version of sustainability and would challenge sports clubs to be much more active within the community in order to fulfill sustainability desires. This is very different from the current implementation of
sustainability by Dutch sports associations and scholars. Neither is wrong, but they are both very much focused on just a single pillar of sustainable development while true progress can only be made when the interconnectedness of the three pillars is recognized, as mentioned in the first section of this paragraph.
The fact that the focus of the sports governance organizations is mostly
environmental does not mean that Dutch amateur sports clubs are not engaged with their community. The Dutch Ministry of Public Health, Welfare and Sports for example launched a program called Sport en Bewegen in de Buurt (Sports and Activity in the Neighborhood) a
5
few years ago which stimulates local sports clubs to assist people to become more active. These people do not necessarily have to join the club and play the club-specific sport, but rather they can make use of the local facilities in an organized manner to get active
(Sportindebuurt, 2016a). This implies that local sports clubs do indeed engage in the more socially engaged version of sustainability as framed by the UN and Girginov and Hills mentioned earlier. And it shows that amateur sports clubs are still regarded as a factor to counteract social problems (Bakken Ulseth, 2004; Schnabel, 2013; Van Bottenburg, 2013). In this context, and with the Netherlands keen to become a society that expects participation from those who are capable of baring the responsibilities (Rijksoverheid, 2013), it seems only reasonable to expect the same from amateur sports clubs.
Nonetheless, a strong division between environmental and social sustainability in the world of sports could prove to be problematic for several reasons. First of all, local amateur sports clubs are heavily reliant on volunteers and many are short on these (Cuskelly, 2004). When the concept of sustainability is split up between an environmental and social part it is very likely that only one of the two will receive attention simply because there are not enough available volunteers for two separate subjects. A second issue is funding, amateur sports clubs in general face a multitude of difficulties in their challenge to stay financially stable (Cordery, Sim and Baskerville, 2013). In the same way the aforementioned lack of volunteers can cause a lack of attention, splitting funds between multiple issues could cause one of these to receive too little to be effective. Thirdly, the earlier mentioned example of the Dutch ministry looking to collaborate with sports clubs also implies that sports clubs have to deal with multi-level governance. Not just their own sports association, but also national and perhaps local governments look to interact with local clubs. Because most amateur sports clubs rely on non-professional boards this could form a problem as not all boards might be able to deal with this complexity (Cuskelly, 2004). Fourthly, focusing too much on environmental sustainability can lead to a disregard of aforementioned societal functions of local sports clubs. So while becoming more environmentally sustainable is something all local amateur sports clubs might want to pursue, this cannot be allowed to lead to the detriment of other aspects of their role within society. Lastly, there is what Van Meter and Van Horn recognize as the disposition of implementing agents. This disposition helps determine if a grass-root organization such as an amateur sports club is interested in cooperating with policy, based on factors such as personal values, self-interest and impact
6
on the organization (Van Meter and Van Horn, 1975).
Sustainability is a challenge that will require a change in society if we are to create a better future. Local sports clubs are still relied upon to play a positive and connecting role in society, meaning that there is an opportunity to use them as contributors to such a change. If these clubs were able to successfully transform into more sustainable organizations for example, this could have a positive spillover impact on the sustainability thinking of the local community (Thøgersen, 1999). However, the previous section shows the problems amateur sports clubs currently face if they were to take such a role upon themselves. This calls for a more inclusive way of thinking about sustainability where clubs include both the
environmental and social aspects of the concept. Meanwhile, from the perspective of sustainability as an academic concept, local sports clubs can thus be a very interesting study case to see how local actors can bring about change on a smaller scale.
The aim of this research is two-fold. Firstly, to gain an understanding of the relationship between Dutch sports governance organizations and Dutch amateur sports clubs and how these sports governance organizations influence the perception of sustainability by the clubs. Secondly, to use this gained knowledge to theorize a more
inclusive way of thinking about sustainability in such a way that the environmental and social aspects of sustainable development become partners of attention, rather than competitors. The particular question this research hopes to answer is the following: How does the framing of the concept of sustainability by Dutch sports governance organizations impact how Dutch amateur sports organizations perceive sustainability?
The concept of sustainability is derived from the concept of sustainable development as first defined by the earlier mentioned Brundtland Commission in 1987: “Development that meets the need of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987: 36). Further elaboration of the concept tells us that this includes a social system that has the solutions against disharmonious development, a production system that respects the ecological base for development and an international system that fosters sustainable trade and finance (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987: 52-53). While this specific report was aimed at an international audience and the international arena of politics it can easily be translated to a more local environment. Respect for the ecological base of our society and a social and financial system that promote sustainability and harmony are
7
the same goals that local governing organizations try to achieve, just like their (inter)national counterparts. The same logic can be applied to amateur sports clubs as they too have to balance their own social, ecological and financial ecosystem. Meanwhile, scholars like Spaargaren and Oosterveen (2010), Stoddart, Tindall and Greenfield (2012) and Kate O’Neill (2009) point out the importance of not just the (international) governance organizations, but also that of the actors on micro and meso-level when it comes to driving for change.
Governments have the ability to change laws and reinforce sustainability ideas with authority, but governing organizations do not always have the incentive to change their policies. This is where individual actors can bring about change by showing their own
initiative. In the ideal situation this individual initiative then feeds back into the national and global governance systems.
8 2. Methodology
This chapter will set about the way in which research was conducted in this thesis. A general overview of the researcher’s approach and structure of this research is followed by an elaboration of how the studied cases were picked. This is then followed by a section on content analysis and a discussion of reliability and validity.
2.1 Approach
Research on a concept such as sustainable development is inherently infused with interpretivist and constructionist elements. The many different existing definitions and conceptualizations of sustainable development show that “social phenomena and their meanings are continually being accomplished by social actors.” (Bryman, 2008: 19). In fact, this entire research and its research question are based on the idea that the social world is constantly being reshaped by the actors that constitute it and agency is based on
interpretations of reality by these actors (Parsons, 1995). And whatever the outcome, this research will also do its part, how little that might be, in reshaping that social world that it attempts to unravel. It is also important to note that, while the research conducted is as neutral as possible, the underlying idea of sustainable development in this thesis is a positive one and is something that should be pursued. This research does in no way judge any of the opinions of those that cooperated and made this research possible, but like Peters, Pierre and Stoker put it: “In practice, rather like the rest of the population, political scientists have different views of political issues and values.” (Peters, Pierre and Stoker, 2010: 327).
This thesis mainly consists out of inductive research as there does not appear to be an already existing body of work on how Dutch sport governance organizations approach the concept of sustainability. Therefore the first step is to assess what this approach is through interviews and an analysis of available policy documents of the sports governance
organizations. Based on this it can be hypothesized how Dutch amateur sports clubs will shape their idea of sustainability. This hypothesis is then to be tested through in-depth interviews with amateur sports clubs. The sub-questions formulated to help answer the research question are derived from the abovementioned steps. The first being what sustainability is and how it relates to sports? Answering this question provides the groundwork for the rest of the thesis as the empirical findings will be tied to the already existing academic literature relating to sports and sustainability. The answer to this first
sub-9
question is likely to determine how much value the empirical findings have outside the more specific field of amateur sports clubs and sustainability. The second and third question then are how sports governing organizations and amateur sports club individually experience and shape their view on sustainability? By answering these questions there should be an
understanding why and how these actors do, or do not do what they do regarding sustainability. The fourth question asks if there is a relationship between the answers to question two and three and what this relationship is. Answering this question leads to the ability to draw a first conclusion however, before a full conclusion and answer to the research question can be produced it is necessary to answer one more sub-question. That question is what the similarities or differences between the different sports that are examined in this research are. Can they be considered as similar or are there specific differences between how different sports approach sustainability? After answering this question it is possible to formulate an answer for the main research question of this thesis.
2.2 Case selection
Choosing certain cases over others inevitably influences the research and its outcome and in the case of this specific research there are a lot of different cases that can be picked. There are plenty of amateur sports organizations in The Netherlands and each has their own story and own reasons to engage or to not engage in sustainability. Starting at the beginning the question is not which sports should be chosen, but rather what kind of sports: individual or team based? The difference being that clubs which practice individual sports are going to have a different social environment than team based sports clubs. There is a choice to be made when it comes to the location of the clubs. Are they situated in an urban area or in a more rural area? How big are the communities that the clubs are embedded in? Smaller societies are likely to see fewer sports clubs thus the clubs that are there have a bigger tendency to influence the entire community instead of a part of it. If a club is located in a city it is likely only part of one or a few neighborhoods and they are also more likely to face competition from other sports (clubs) in terms of membership. Then there is also the issue of indoor and outdoor sports and if the facilities of the sports club are or are not owned by the club.
The choice made for this research are the clubs and the national associations from the sports of football and korfball of which two football clubs and one korfball club
10
participated in in-depth interviews, while two more football clubs provided answers through an e-mail questionnaire. Both of these sports are team sports that are widely spread among the country and both are ranked among the top ten of most practiced team sports in The Netherlands (NOC*NSF, 2016a). Their sports seasons, and use of facilities, generally mirror each other. Major difference is the fact that korfball moves inside during the winter months whereas football stays outdoors. This means that korfball needs two types of facilities, indoor and outdoor, while football only needs outdoor facilities. While not exactly the same, it makes for an interesting variable to see if it makes any difference in sustainability thinking for clubs. Another difference which is not expected to have an impact is the fact that korfball is a mixed sport while football is a single sex sport. However, football has both men’s and women’s competitions and all clubs participating in this research appear to have at least one women’s team next to men’s. Another difference is the demographic of the different sports. Stokvis (2012) mentions two different forms of stratification within the Dutch sports
landscape that have materialized between the end of the 19th century and today. First, there is a difference in the public perception of the image of certain sports compared to others, causing different members of society to identify more or less with different kinds of sports. Second, there exists a hierarchy among clubs within a single sports based on social status. Similar to the aforementioned differences in social status among sports there are also differences to be found among sports clubs within a certain sport. With football as the biggest, very accessible and historically most democratized (Stokvis, 2012) sport it is likely to see a lot of different variety among the social backgrounds of its members. Korfball
meanwhile has the reputation of being a family sport where both parents play at the same club and subsequently enroll their kids too. It also tends to financially be a little more accessible than hockey. This makes for some subtle differences between the demographic and social backgrounds of the different types of sport, which could have an impact on the approach of sustainability.
All participating clubs have around 250 members or more. This criterion makes sure that the clubs have enough volunteers available to focus on more than just the core sporting activities and thus have the ability to focus on sustainability. Size of the organization is also taken into account as a variable when conducting the research. As for the location of the clubs there is a reasonable amount of variety between location and size of the community in which the clubs are located. The korfball club is located in a large city (150.000 citizens),
11
three out of four football clubs are located in communities with 20.000 to 70.000 citizens and football club SCW Rijsenhout is located in a small village of around 5.000 citizens. This should help control for the difference between urban area sports clubs and rural area sports clubs and possible impacts on sustainability thinking between these clubs. This is no
guarantee that all differences between urban and rural area sports clubs are found, since the sample size is still only five clubs. Major differences between the sizes of the communities were most notable for the two smallest villages: Lisse and Rijsenhout. Especially the latter displayed a strong connection and focus on the entire community.
As for the associations the analysis consists of any of their available policy documents on sustainability and an interview with a KNVB official responsible for the subject of
sustainability. The aim of this is to find out what their position is regarding sustainability and how they are working together with the clubs. One of the most important aspects of the interview is establishing how exactly the association in question defines the concept of sustainability and what their aim behind this definition is. Doing so enabled the possibility to identify possible differences between associations and clubs in their respective approaches to sustainability.
2.3 Policy document analysis
The analysis of the available policy documents of sports governance associations and amateur sports clubs is done through content analysis. Since the sample of available policy documents appears to be small, little value is placed on the different kinds of publicly available information. Instead, the focus is mostly on the actual content of the documents and how the concept of sustainability is portrayed.
2.4 Reliability and validity
When talking about reliability and validity this research heavily depends on the quality of the interviews. Thorough interviews help create a deeper understanding of how sustainability is experienced, but that requires the interviewee to have an actual understanding of how their club deals with sustainability instead of giving his or her personal opinion on the subject. It is also important to keep in mind that there are many sports and many clubs so there is always a chance that the experiences of the interviewees do not match those of other clubs that are not interviewed. Reliability wise interviews are inherently not risk-free as the interview is always likely to be different when done by another researcher at another moment in time.
12
There’s also the possibility that interviewees give socially desirable answer, especially when discussing a delicate concept such as sustainable development. To mitigate as much of the reliability and validity risks as possible all interviews are thoroughly documented and transcribed. A list of topics for the interviews with clubs based on the insights given by the sports governance organizations and academic literature is also documented. Any notable differences between interviews due to specific circumstances during the interviews are also to be noted and documented. Each interview a list of topics was brought along to make sure all were touched upon. However, due to the nature of the topic and the aim of the
interviews, they were held as semi-structured interviews to give the interviewee the chance to truly speak his or her mind. Giving the interviewee freedom to speak is imperative for this research as it is this freedom that should allow showing the differences, if there are any, between the different cases. This means that interviews vary in length and are framed in the different views of different clubs. This makes for a more authentic and personal story for each club, while still covering all main topics required for this research.
It is also important to note that this research deliberately focuses on just the sports associations and amateur clubs in The Netherlands, while ignoring the international
federations and national and local governments. The reason being is that the international federations are mostly focused on setting out the broad strategy for their respective sports as a whole while also organizing international tournaments (Forster, 2006). The national associations are then generally fairly free in their approach of how to organize the sport in their own country, which includes a philosophy on, for example, sustainability. The reason not to include national and local governments in interviews, but merely use them as an external factor comes from the fact that according to the Brundtland Report (1987) the government is expected to engage in sustainable development as more thoroughly
explained in chapter three on sustainability. This means that there is no need to answer the question if the national government is or is not concerned with sustainability, because naturally they are. Especially in a developed country like The Netherlands, which tries to actively play a role in the field of international politics and the United Nations, it is expected that the national and subsequently local governments are actively seeking to promote sustainable development. This narrows the scope of the research and with that the scope of the conclusion drawn from the research, but on the other hand allows for a more focused
13
and thorough examination of the relationship between sports governance organizations and local amateur sports clubs.
14 3. Sustainability
This chapter will elaborate on the concept of sustainable development. First, by explaining the origin of the concept, followed by paragraphs explaining how sustainability can be seen from an international and local perspective. The chapter will then end by describing how the world of sports deals with sustainability while ending with a section on the theoretical position of local amateur sports clubs within the bigger debate.
3.1 General overview
The concept of sustainability is derived from the concept of sustainable development as first defined by the Brundtland Commission in 1987: “Development that meets the need of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987: 36). This definition is based on the ‘needs’ of people, especially the poor, and also the role of the state as one to set the boundaries for technology and social organization as to preserve “the environment’s ability to meet present and future needs” (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987: 36) intact. While this implies that sustainable development is mainly focused on the environment it has close ties to other subjects such as underdevelopment and social justices. Through the starting point of environmental problems and further discussion among United Nations members it became evident that these problems were the result of social and economic factors and that these too needed to be addressed next to environmental issues (Egelston, 2013). In fact, all three of these spheres are interconnected to the point where true sustainable development can only be achieved by addressing all of them (Strange and Bayley, 2008).
As mentioned in the previous section sustainable development needs governments to set boundaries. This implies that the government should create restrictions to stop society from going against sustainable development. However, the report generally interprets it differently with the government fulfilling a positive role as promoter of sustainability. It is imperative that the government takes such a role upon itself. For if it does not society might push in exactly the opposite direction or even worse, meaning the government might
actually assist with destructive policies. At the same point governments have to deal with the fact that the world these days is more interconnected than ever and that economic gains are more and more made internationally. This means that governments will have to
15
collaborate to create a distribution of said gains to be as fair and equal as possible.
Unfortunately the world still has a long way to go towards fairness and equality, resulting in an inability to promote the common good that is sustainable development. Taking it all together, the concept of sustainable development tells us it needs a social system that has the solutions against disharmonious development, a production system that respects the ecological base for development and an international system that fosters sustainable trade and finance (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987: 52-53). Through this it aims to eradicate poverty while conserving natural resources, expand economic growth while celebrating diversity and public participation which should result in equal access for every member of society (Egelston, 2013).
This thesis will use the Brundtland definition and conception of sustainable
development as its starting point for various reasons; first it is among the most well-known definitions; second, while sustainable development can be understood as a very complex issue, the description given is fairly clear and straightforward; thirdly, since it is seen as a landmark definition many of the later definitions inhabit some, if not all, of the aspects described by the Brundtland Commission. Besides that, this thesis will build upon the idea that sustainable development starts at the local level. The reasoning to do so will be further elaborated on in this chapter. Before doing so however, it is important to look at some of the many other ideas on how to organize sustainable development to get a better
understanding of the different views on the concept. As early as 1997, Susan Murcott reported of no less than 57 different interpretations of sustainable development. Looking at some of the more widely known perspectives should give both an overview of the
complexity of the sustainability debate and a justification as to why the local perspective is best for this research. Lastly, this research will mainly focus on the environmental and social spheres of sustainable development. While amateur sports clubs do have a budget to keep an eye on which in its own right can be observed as part of sustainable development, the aim of this research is not to look at the sustainability of amateur sports clubs but rather what they can contribute to sustainable development in general. When finances are mentioned in this research it will be because they have an impact on the way sports clubs can contribute to environmental or social sustainable development.
16
3.2 Global sustainable development
One could say that a global, multilateral governance perspective on sustainable
development might be the most natural evolution of the concept, since the development of the concept initially started through United Nations conferences, leading up to the
Brundtland Commission (Egelston, 2013). While the United Nations is first and foremost an organization ran by states, non-state actors have not shied away from getting involved in the debate. Global sustainable development, or global sustainable governance, can therefore be roughly divided into state-led and non-state actor global sustainable governance.
3.2.1 State-led global sustainable development
State-led sustainable development relies heavily upon regimes that are sometimes enforced by treaties which states may or may not sign. These treaties can sometimes be a
confirmation of an already existing international regime, while other times they try to create one. A regime as such is created when countries decide to follow a certain set of principles, norms, rules and decision-making procedures and is based on cooperation (Krasner, 1983). Treaties are a tool that can support a regime by lawfully obligating states to uphold
standards or denounce certain practices (Egelston, 2013). A good example of this is the World Trade Organization (WTO) which demands its members open up their markets to freely trade amongst each other. By doing so the WTO is trying to foster and monitor world trade while also providing a platform to settle disputes (Matsushita et al., 2015). The willingness of states to comply with such treaties varies between different states and treaties and is the result of a complex set of factors. This goes as far as different
governmental departments discussing among each other what the right approach should be, while national non-state actors also try to influence their government (Strange and Bayley, 2008; O’Neill, 2009).
Once a result has been achieved on the national level the discussion moves to the international stage. There the discussion continues, generally organized by the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) through large conferences in a multilateral debate (Egelston, 2013). While states vary in size and power there is one significant division among states within the sustainable development debate, which is between the Northern and Southern hemispheres. States in the Northern hemisphere of the earth are generally seen as the more developed countries, while states in the southern hemisphere are mostly countries that did
17
not start their modern development or even independence until halfway the 20th century (Sachs, 1997; O’Neill, 2009). This division causes a complex situation where developed states are urging developing states to become more sustainable. Meanwhile these developing nations are looking to grow their economy and modernize their country, something that generally clashes with sustainable development. However, one could also say history has seen an abuse of the Southern hemisphere by developed states and thus they have a right to ask for compensation (O’Neill, 2009). As such, the discussion on how to deal with global sustainable development and its governance or the establishment of an effective regime is a difficult one. Another issue is that while policy can be created at the international level, it has to be carried out at a different level. Like Young points out: “This *…+ will be particularly pertinent in cases such as climate change because the problem to be solved involves
behavior that reaches all the way down to the actions of *the+ individual.” (Young, 1997: 275).
3.2.2 Non-state actor global sustainable development
While sustainable development might have its origins in the state-led United Nations, there are plenty of non-state actors involved in the debate. As Egelston (2013) points out, some non-governmental organizations (NGOs) such as the International Red Cross even predate the United Nations, so NGOs are not new to the realm of international relations. Although the UN has strict rules regarding the participation of NGOs in its conferences many times NGOs do participate because they can provide expert information (Auer, 2000). 1996
ECOSOC regulation allows NGOs from all different levels to participate, ranging from local to internationally active organizations (Egelston, 2013).
Having a voice in these UN conferences is not the only way for non-state actors to act on sustainable development. 1993 saw the introduction of a new kind of governance regime, organized solely by non-governmental actors. The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) sought to both protect forests all over the world from disappearing, while also allowing commercial partners to still continue their activities. Together, the participating actors created a
voluntary certification scheme which saw commercial actors follow a certain set of rules. These rules would allow them to continue their business, but in a way that would not be detrimental to nature. Meanwhile, non-governmental actors such as the World Wildlife Fund would endorse companies with an FSC label (O’Neill, 2009). This cooperation of several
18
different non-governmental and commercial actors is now among the most well-known of its kind, but more importantly it created a new way of market-driven global sustainable
governance and all that without needing governmental authority. Such a form of self-restraint and stewardship could perhaps be a more viable system compared to liberal capitalism (Maser, 1997). The voluntary aspect however, is also one of the big problems of non-state global governance. It relies on consumers, commercial actors and NGOs to agree and when one of these does not then the effectiveness is questionable. Many of these consumers, commercial actors and NGOs also do not operate on the international level which again reinforces Young’s (1997) argument that sustainable development is generally carried out at lower levels.
3.3 Local sustainable development
Meanwhile, scholars like Young (1997), but also Spaargaren and Oosterveen (2010),
Stoddart, Tindall and Greenfield (2012) and Kate O’Neill (2009) point out the importance of not just the (international) governance organizations, but also that of the actors on micro and meso-level when it comes to driving for change. While it appears that the initial need for governmental boundaries makes it seem like society inherently works against sustainable development, this does not mean that individual actors within society cannot play a positive role. Governments have the ability to change laws and reinforce sustainability ideas with authority, but governing organizations do not always have the incentive to change their policies (Stoddart, Tindall and Greenfield, 2012). This is where individual actors can bring about change by showing their own initiative. In the ideal situation this individual initiative then feeds back into the national and global governance systems. As Princen et al. mention “local approaches approximate the conditions for sustainable economies” (Princen et al. 1994: 221) meaning that sustainable solutions finds their roots in local actors acting as such (Princen et al, 1994). When this behavior is then copied by other actors it eventually creates a new, more sustainable system.
Meanwhile, the international level is also not the only level where policies are being made nor is it the level where more sustainable behavior is to be carried out, as mentioned in the paragraph on state-led sustainable development. Plenty of times actors below the national level organize themselves and even create transnational networks. Sub-state actors can play an important role where international negotiations have not yet begun or have
19
failed to produce serious results. Another important aspect is the fact that internationally organized sustainability initiatives do not necessarily work the same way in different places (O’Neill, 2009). Many factors such as cultural differences, political differences and
environmental differences ask for different approaches which is where the sub-state or local actors come into play. These actors can provide expert knowledge about their specific area which might prove invaluable and they are perhaps better equipped to assess local problems and possible solutions (Lipsky, 1980).
Based on this one could argue that the local sphere could be the single most important aspect in the pursuit of sustainable development. However, it is important to keep in mind that while the local level might have its advantages, there are also
disadvantages. Approaching sustainability from a local or national perspective brings with it the risk of nationalism or protectionism and with that the creation of new problems at the international level (Oosterveer, Guivant and Spaargaren, 2007). Therefore it is necessary to not lose focus of the scope of the core problem as sustainable development is something that affects the entire world.
3.4 Sustainability in sports
A translation of the idea of sustainability to the world of sports has since long been recognized. As mentioned earlier the United Nations mention sports as “an important enable of sustainable development” (United Nations, 2016). But sports doesn’t just have the ability to enable sustainability, it also needs to become more sustainable in order to make sure we can still enjoy sports in the future. With the current size of sports competitions all around the world the ecological impact of sports on the world has grown. A combination of the growth of the modern Olympic games and the growing importance of (ecological) sustainability in general since the Brundtland Commission naturally led to more
environmental awareness in sports. This first came into fruition in 1994, in response to the 1992 United Nations summit in Rio de Janeiro. The 1994 Centennial Olympics Congress of Paris saw the first report of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) on sustainability with ‘Agenda 21. Sport for sustainable development’. Juan Antonio Samaranch, president of the IOC at the time, wrote the following in the foreword: “The Centennial Olympic Congress *…+ devoted part of its debates to sport and the environment, and *…+ called *…+ for the inclusion in the Olympic Charter of a provision underlining the necessity of preserving the
20
environment *…+ *and+ the creation of an IOC Commission on Sport and the Environment.” (Samaranch, 1999: 7) while also connecting ecological sustainability with the idea of Olympism: “This is totally in conformity with the goal of Olympism, which is to place everywhere sport at the service of the harmonious development of man.” (Samaranch, 1999: 7). The International Olympic Committee then adopted the environment as its third pillar upon which it is built (Schmidt, 2006).
While the environmental pillar immediately connects with a sense of sustainability it is the social aspect of the Olympics that might be even more in line with building a social system that has solutions against disharmonious development. The Olympic tournaments are based on the idea of Olympism: “A philosophy of life, exalting and combining in a balanced whole the qualities of body, will and mind. Blending sport with culture and
education, Olympism seeks to create a way of life based on the joy of effort, the educational value of good example, social responsibility and respect for universal fundamental ethical principles.” (International Olympic Committee, 2015: 13). While not necessarily mentioned as sustainable development by the IOC it does embody a lot of elements that would help create a more sustainable social system. Historically this was also one of the motivations of IOC founder Pierre de Coubertin who sought to connect different cultures and create acceptance and respect (Guttmann, 1992; Powell, 1994). Thus from a social perspective it can be said that the idea of Olympism has always resonated sustainability.
A good example of the evolution of sports and sustainable development are the London Olympics of 2012, which were the first games to not only focus on short term issues that might come with organizing such a large event, but also attempting to use them to tackle long term social problems such as obesity and unemployment (Girginov and Hills, 2009). While the true result of this ambitious program remains unclear and has received valid critique (Coakley and Souza, 2013; Girginov, 2016) it is still an important first step towards a better integration of sports and the tackling of social problems.
A major difference with the Brundtland Commission appears to be the financial side of the concept. There appears to be no literature concerned with research aimed at finding a link between sports and sustainable trade and finance. There is literature by for example Cordery, Sim and Baskerville (2013) who conducted research on financial vulnerability of amateur sports clubs, but this is solely aimed on the finances of clubs and not ways in which sports can help create a more sustainable financial system as a whole. Therefore
21
sustainability in this research should be understood as sustainable development in an environmental and social manner.
As mentioned in the previous paragraph sustainability starts at the local level with local actors acting sustainable (Princen et al., 1994). When local actors all act more or less in a synchronized way, that is pursuing more sustainable ways of existence, it should then lead to a more sustainable system. It is in this context that (amateur) sports clubs can play an interesting role within their local communities as creators of a place where people can meet each other and connect, while also taking on the role of promoter of environmental
sustainability.
3.5 Local amateur sports clubs and sustainability
The local view mentioned in the previous paragraph is supported by the findings in this research, as it appears local clubs take it into their own hands to start both ecological and social sustainability initiatives. Clubs reported very positive on both subjects as they mention, for example, the installation of solar panels, but also plans to involve people who ‘fall outside society’ in sports. These initiatives show clubs are perfectly capable of becoming more sustainable themselves. Furthermore, especially the social functions an amateur sports club has are stressed by the clubs themselves. They do believe that a sports club should do more than just provide the opportunity to participate in sports to its members. Be it through simply providing a meeting place for individuals other than their own members or
participating in social projects, clubs all reported activities outside their core sporting activities. The same can be said of ecological sustainability, albeit less resounding and combined with stronger financial motives. Clubs are happy to become more ecologically sustainable, but steep financial costs prove a much more difficult obstacle compared to motivating volunteers to participate in social projects.
Sports governance organizations report that they are active on both the ecological and social sustainability themes. However, respondents from clubs all noted that while this is true, the sports governance organizations are not the driving force behind this. As said, the initiative mostly comes from within the clubs themselves. Sports governance organizations reportedly provide little more than information and support according to the clubs
themselves. Meanwhile, it remains unclear to what extent the Dutch government can push sustainable initiatives through sports governance organizations (O’Gorman, 2011). For local
22
amateur sports clubs however, this does not need to be a problem as clubs seem to be relatively content with the support provided by their respective sports governance organizations.
Surprisingly, the same lack of driving force goes for local government. While it was expected that national and local governments would promote both social and ecological sustainability this turns out to be less prevalent in reality. While both provide financial resources to support sustainability initiatives, they do not seem to actively pursue
sustainability when it comes to the local amateur sports clubs. This shows that there is no governing body, either sports or political, really pushing for an improvement in
sustainability, if not for the clubs themselves. Besides a lack of action from local government it is also worrying to note that in some cases sports clubs are even hindered in their
attempts to become more sustainable, especially when speaking of ecological sustainability. There seem to be a number of different, but perhaps also interconnected reasons for this. First, ecologically sustainable measures are costly, especially for local amateur sports clubs who do not have hundreds of thousands of Euros available to spend. This in itself is not necessarily a problem, because national and local governments usually have subsidies available. However, when pairing this with other problems, such as municipal ownership of property, bad relationships between club and local government or simply disinterest from governmental side this becomes an extra obstacle. As will be elaborated on further in chapter four, the Dutch national government has several running projects to support both ecological and social sustainability in The Netherlands. These programs however, are then executed on a local level. Because of this there is a big role to be played by local bodies such as municipalities and according to sports clubs this could be done much more effective than the current situation.
23 4. Who governs sports?
This chapter will give an overview of the governance of sports in The Netherlands through a historic overview of the evolution of sports governance and through a closer look at the contemporary situation and some of the available tools to promote policy.
4.1 History of Dutch national sports governance
On a national level there is generally a single national sports federation for each sport, this federation is then usually connected to its international counterpart. As mentioned these national federations are recognized in their autonomy by these same international
counterparts (Chappelet, 2010). The amount of autonomy however, is different amongst the respective IFs with some choosing not to interfere with national affairs whatsoever, while others choose to be less strict in their definition of autonomy (Chappelet, 2010).
In the Netherlands the main sports governance body is called NOC*NSF (National Olympic Committee National Sports Federation) which is a combination of the Olympic committee and the former national federation of sports. The NSF originated from the NOC in 1946 as the general assembly had decided to split the specific Olympic tasks and the more general sports tasks between two different organizations, instead of keeping them all within the Olympic committee. As the organizations kept close ties and cooperated in many
different occasions the decision was made in 1993 to merge both organizations back into a single entity thus going back to the original situation from before 1946 (NOC*NSF, 2016b).
In 2005 the NOC*NSF published a document with recommendations for good governance meant for its affiliated national sports federations. In the following years the NOC*NSF also introduced a ranking system to rank the federations based on the
recommendations for good governance. Federations that ranked low risked a severe cut in their finances, thus forcing them to comply (Chappelet, 2010). While this has resulted in much improved transparency of Dutch sports governance, it also shows the significant power the NOC*NSF holds over Dutch sports federations as they are financially dependent.
In the Netherlands sport policy is mostly focused on the topics of health,
inclusiveness, safety and fairness when it comes to amateur sports. This is something that goes back to the historic development of sports as a subject of policy within the Dutch national government. The creation of the Ministry of Culture, Recreation and Social Work in 1965 was the first time sports almost made its way into the name of a department.
24
However, the responsible minister saw his efforts fall short and he had to settle for
‘Recreation’ instead (Van Bottenburg, 2002). Still, the transfer of sports to this new ministry, away from the Ministry of Education, Art and Science, was a step in a new direction. While sports had now moved out of the margin of policy, the focus was still on the general welfare of the people and not so much on sport itself and how it should be organized. It was not until 1979 for example, that the government issued its first policy on ‘topsport’1 (Van Bottenburg, 2002). The focus on welfare can still be seen today as sports is now officially added to the name of a department, but the accompanying themes of this ministry are public health and welfare. O’Gorman’s (2011) observation that there is little to no analysis of sports policy implementation in general can also been seen when specifically looking at The Netherlands. However, next to the lack of analysis there also appears to be little, if any, policy on the way sports governance organizations should be organized. Or what kind of influence the Dutch national government has on these organizations. It remains unclear how national policy can be implemented through the organizational pyramid of sports
governance organizations such as described earlier, underpinning the same autonomy that sports enjoy on an international level.
4.2 Current situation in Dutch sports governance
An interesting line can be drawn to the work of Skille and Säfvenbom (2011) who conducted research on the situation regarding sport policy and organization in Norway. A lack of research towards sports governance in the Netherlands cannot be completely mitigated by looking at the Norwegian situation, but it can provide some indirect academic insights into the tools the Dutch government likely has at its disposal to implement policy through sports governance organizations. At the top of the pyramid, like in The Netherlands, sits the
Norwegian Olympic Committee and National Sports Federation organization. While there are some organizational differences within this pyramid, it is clear that just like in The
Netherlands it is a closed system on which the Norwegian parliament does not have much influence. While conclusive evidence does not exist in academic literature, all evidence points towards a similar situation in The Netherlands. The only policy tools the Norwegian
1
‘Topsport’ is a concept with a very broad understanding. A narrow definition speaks of participation at the highest international levels and practices of sports on a daily and primary basis, over work or education and he or she is recognized in this by NOC*NSF (Knas, 2016). However, a case can be made that for example
25
government has appear to be public information, grants and contracts (Seippel, 2005; 2006). Through these it can try to influence the thoughts of the people; stimulate or support a certain initiative through financial resources; and legally bind a private entity to deliver a service. All of these are heavily dependent on the willingness of the cooperating party and none of them prove to be very effective (Skille and Säfvenbom, 2011). The Dutch Sports and Activity in the Neighborhood program is set up in such a way that it reflects the same lack of power the Norwegian government faces. Participation in sports is being promoted through grants and Buurtsportcoaches (neighborhoodsportscoach) (Sportindebuurt, 2016a) who, as the name says have the assignment to coach rather than enforce. Their role is more
proactive than just providing information as they can provide some services, but like public information it lacks the ability to enforce. More specifically, these Buurtsportcoaches have the assignment to “organize the availability of sport and activity within a neighborhood and make a connection between providers of sport and activity and other sectors such as *…+ welfare *…+ and education.” (Sportindebuurt, 2016b). As this is a rather broad assignment, this way of policy implementation runs the risk that “the decisions of street-level
bureaucrats, the routines they establish, and the devices they invent to cope with uncertainties and work pressures, effectively become the public policies they carry out” (Lipsky, 1980: 12). Because the assignment is defined in such a broad way the
Buurtsportcoach is given a lot of freedom to carry it out as he or she sees fit. As the objective
is to organize sporting activities and contact local providers, it seems highly likely that many of these coaches will contact local amateur sports clubs for assistance. Because there is such a huge variety among sports clubs, depending on location, size and kind of sport among other factors, this will have an influence on how exactly the Buurtsportcoach will design his or her sports availability and activities. Also, because the Buurtsportcoach cannot force sports clubs to do anything the relationship between the two has to be one of cooperation. This means that both parties should have the ability to influence the outcome of the
cooperation, practically allowing amateur sports clubs to help shape the public policy of Lipsky’s street-level bureaucrat, the Buurtsportcoach. The possibility of sports club to exert influence further reinforces the autonomy of the local amateur sports club over that of the state, whereas a more specific assignment or more executive power for the Buurtsportcoach could have potentially asserted the autonomy of the state.
26
sportklimaat (Towards a safer sports climate). The official document from the ministry
speaks of cooperation with the Dutch sports governance organizations rather than an implementation of new policy which the governance organizations are to follow (Ministerie VWS, 2011). The actual implementation however, is still in the hands of the NOC*NSF and the program is theirs to design. This time it is actually the Dutch ministry assuming the position of the street-level bureaucrat, where their decision to let the NOC*NSF design the
Naar een veiliger sportklimaat program means that it’s not the ministry, but the sports
governance organization who decided what the program is going to look like.
Last but not least the voluntary aspect of local sports clubs adds another dimension of autonomy to policy implementation and hierarchy. Most local sports clubs are highly dependent on volunteers to run the organization. These volunteers have no obligation to the state and only limited obligation to comply with sports governance organizations (Skille, 2008). Something that was also found in Scotland where the majority of the respondents in a research stated they assisted in achieving certain policy out of the love for their sports and to be able to give something back to the community. Not because they felt the need to oblige to state policy (Allison, 2001). So even when, for example a Buurtsportcoach
approaches a sports club to assist this club it is still at the discretion of the club to decide if they accept this help. Neither the government nor the NOC*NSF seem to have the ability to make a definitive decision in this matter. This shows that (local) amateur sports clubs have a lot of autonomy on both whether they want to partake in sustainable development and also on how exactly they want to do so if they do decide to partake. Interestingly enough,
amateur sports clubs (at least in The Netherlands) might be on their way to become, or already are, among the most autonomous actors in sports. As will be further discussed in chapter five, the international world of sports has seen a growth in different kinds of stakeholders. National sports federations might still have a certain degree of autonomy in their own countries, but only because they comply with regulation from the international level. As such, they are not completely safeguarded from stakeholder influence on the international level without running the risk to completely cut ties with their international counterpart. Meanwhile, amateur clubs still have a great deal of autonomy as they have little accountable responsibilities to their own sports federation, but also the (national) government.
27 5. Background: International sports governance
This chapter will provide background information for chapter four on Dutch sports governance by showing how the international world of sports governance is currently organized.
5.1 International sports governance autonomy
When explaining the world of sports governance organizations and other involved actors one should traditionally start at the very top which are the international sports governance organizations. These organizations can be classified as Non-Governmental International Sports Organizations (INGSOs) when speaking in terms of broader governance literature terms. They stand at the top of the hierarchy and are generally the single most powerful entity in their branch of sport (Croci and Forster, 2004; Forster, 2006; Chappelet, 2010). A good example is the IOC, an organization about which much is unknown when it comes to the intricacies of its organizational structure, finances and who is in power. It is known however, that while nations are represented by national Olympic movements instead of delegates of the national government (Chappelet, 2010); many of its members are prominent members of society in nations all over the world. This intertwinement of
functions of power appears to be mostly unique to the IOC (Bruyninckx, 2009). Though there are other international sports governance organizations with similar powerful people
amongst its members, these are generally more restricted to the world of sports. As the Olympics grew to be the biggest and most importance sports event in the world so has the power of the IOC grown (Chappelet, 2015). The aforementioned hierarchy running from the international level all the way to the local level ensures that the INGSOs have autonomy over their respective sport, autonomy that many INGSOs safeguard by having their legal base in Switzerland (Mrkonjic, 2013). The global governance bodies then force compliance directly from national bodies or through a continental body in between, by having them abide to their charter. In return the continental and national bodies receive certain rights, such as participation in international competitions (Geeraert et al., 2015).
Forster (2006) recognizes three different categories in which INGSOs can be classified, based on their different functions within the realm of international sports. First are the organizations which govern sport at a global level such as the De Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA). It is however, important to notice that there
28
are several solo sports where there are multiple governance organizations, this is a result of the solo sports player being an independent enterprise as opposed to team sports where players are considered employees (on the professional level). Then there are the
organizations that organize global single sport events such as the Olympics by the IOC. Last there are organizations with specialist functions such as the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). Many of these organizations from the last category are internationally recognized by the other INGSOs and national governments.
5.2 International autonomy wanes
In recent years however, international sports governance has been undergoing a transition towards a more networked form of governance as governmental actors and other
stakeholders have been able to penetrate the traditional hierarchy (Geeraert, 2013; Geeraert et al., 2015). A great example of this is the 1995 Bosman case in which Belgian football player Jean-Marc Bosman was prohibited by his former club (RFC de Liège) to sign a contract at a new club (USL Dunkerque) by asking a very high transfer fee. Under FIFA regulation at the time this was entirely legal, making it practically impossible for a player to sign with a new club if his former club did not agree. The case was ultimately taken to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) which ruled that players with an expired contract were free to sign with any club they wanted without this new club having to pay a transfer fee (E.C.R., 1995). From a European Union perspective, this case was simply about common EU citizen rights. However, for the football world the case had much bigger implications. Since the Bosman case EU institutions have taken a closer look at sports in general and have become more actively involved in shaping policy that affects, for example, football regulation (Garcia, 2007). More recently it has again called upon the European sports governance organizations to strife for good governance “within the limits of the law, democracy, transparency and accountability in decision-making, and inclusiveness in the representation of interested stakeholders.” (European Commission, 2011: 10). A main reason behind this has been the increased commercialization of sports in general and with it the sudden interest of new stakeholders, but also the empowerment of actors lower in the hierarchy through increased financial resources (Geeraert et al., 2015). The first has come to fruition through
partnerships of sports governance organizations with commercial partners (Sugden, 2002). The latter became evident when fourteen of the biggest European football clubs threatened
29
to form their own league in 1998. The European Union has however, also recognized the autonomy of sports governance associations as “the European Council stresses its support for the independence of sports organisations and their right to organise themselves *…+ [and] it recognises that *…+ it is the task of sporting organisations to organise and promote their particular sports *…+ in the way which they think best reflects their objectives.”
(European Council, 2000). While INGSOs still have tools to exert their power, such as denying a country or national association a certain (global) sports event or participation in such an event (Forster, 2006; Geeraert et al., 2015), it becomes clear that international sports governance organizations will have to accept that they share their world with other
stakeholders such as governmental and commercial parties and that these stakeholders are looking to leave their own mark on the world of sports.
30 6. Findings and analysis
This chapter will provide an overview of the empirical evidence of this research. First, it will set out the findings on the sports governance organizations. Second, the findings on the local amateur sports clubs will be described and analysed. Finally, a brief conclusion will sum up the most important findings.
6.1 Sports governance organizations
6.1.1 Publicly available documents and webpages
In terms of publicly available documents the football association KNVB has recently (2016) published documents which mention sustainability (KNVB, 2016b), the korfball association KNKV does not. Both of the two associations, the KNVB and KNKV, have a page dedicated to sustainability on their respective websites (KNVB, 2016a; KNKV, 2016). No other recent documents or information on websites could be found that specifically speaks of
sustainability, except for some webpages with topics related to sustainability. These will be mentioned in the next paragraph that will cover the actual content of the documents and webpages. As for authenticity, credibility and representativeness it appears that all pages and documents are genuine, as they are published on the websites of the respective sports governance organizations. When speaking of meaning, not all of the documents and webpages were dedicated solely to sustainability. Besides the two aforementioned mentioned webpages and single webpage (KNVB, 2016a; KNVB, 2016b; KNKV, 2016), sustainability was merely a subject covered next to other subjects, instead of the sole focus of the document or webpage.
6.1.2 Content of publicly available documents and webpages
Both organizations solely frame sustainability as environmental sustainability in their documents and on their webpages. As for the content of the documents and webpages the KNKV (2016) is the only organization which mentions the use of an actual definition, which says: “The execution of projects which have a positive effect on the ecological environment through the cutting of costs and greening, while also having a positive effect on the
organizing of korfball, intern (within the labourorganization [sic] and the association board) and extern (within the aligned korfball clubs). Connecting and raising of awareness of the organization, its member clubs and member individuals plays a prominent role in all of it.”
31
(KNKV, 2016). The goal of the KNKV is to simplify the concept of sustainability, which they recognize as complex. This simplification is then further elaborated on by explaining that sustainability should be seen as an opportunity for clubs to cut financial and ecological expenses.
The cutting of financial expenses can be seen as one of two major themes among the available documents and webpages. Both sports governance organizations mention
sustainability as an opportunity to save on expenses and all three also direct the reader to a subsidy provided by the Dutch national government: Subsidieregeling Energiebesparing en
duurzame energie sportaccommodaties (Subsidy Energysavings and sustainable energy
sports accommodations) (KNKV, 2016; KNVB, 2016a). The other theme is awareness and promotion of sustainability. Again, both organizations speak of raising awareness on sustainability, promoting sustainability, or both (KNKV, 2016; KNVB, 2016c).
6.2 Sports governance representatives 6.2.1 KNVB
The interview with a representative from the KNVB reaffirmed the initial statement from the documents and webpages that sustainability is first and foremost focused on the
environment. When speaking of ‘sustainability’ there is no division between social and environmental, because sustainability solely means environmental sustainability within the KNVB. While the organization does have a department that focuses on the social aspect of sustainability, this is a separate department that runs its own projects. This department also appears to receive more funding from the Dutch national government (Appendix A). So while there is the subsidy mentioned in the previous paragraph it seems that, the Dutch government does prioritize social projects such as the Buurtsportcoaches mentioned in chapter four, according to the interviewee.
Interestingly enough, the interviewee was responsible for corporate social
responsibility and he also mentioned that personally, he preferred to look at sustainability as a broader concept, more in line with the academic view. The KNVB also recently started an in-house project with the aim to further develop their conception of sustainability, led by the definition created by the Brundtland Commission (Appendix A). As such, it appears that sustainability within the KNVB might get a different meaning in coming years. A meaning that is more corresponding with the international view on sustainability, as the interviewee
