Sociological Theory in Sports - Coursework Example

Significance of sociological Theory in Sports Sport is a quantity in societies that is ever changing. It covers a wide range of activities, organizations, people and structures. In a dynamic environment such as this, change is inevitable. The rules of any sport give a model for the participants in the roles of their games. Just like the rules, management also provides a framework for which guides the participants achieve strategic and operational goals. Sociology is still a young concept in sports. However, the ability to think and visualize in a liberal minded manner, the term may be worth giving it more thought. Skinner, Zakus & Edwards (2005) posit that sociology theory may contribute to the discussion regarding the development of sport management practices and policies. This essay aims to analyse the significance of sociology theory to sport management by studying modern sports issues. This paper is concerned with how sports play a role in fostering social inclusion to aid in social inclusion and community development. According to Coalter (2007), there have been two sports policies brought up: to increase social and sports participation trough geographically targeted programs in socially deprived locations and to emphasize the contribution that sports volunteering can make to activate citizenship. Relatively, sports sociology is still a new term. Chalip, Thomas & Voyle (1996) defines it as the study of “the sports person as a sociological being in a particular context” Giddens (1997). He also postulates that it includes the study of contemporary social models which influence sport, specifically those that have lasted. They also believe that sport sociology is morally bound to consider the process and results of inequality and ignorance that exist in sport. Sociology also allows the range of common beliefs practices and attitudes to be reviewed and analysed with the sole purpose of giving best quality of sporting experience to shareholders. Chalip, Thomas & Voyle (1996) discuss the value of the sociological theory relation in four areas: as a stimulus for new ideas, the ability to clarify or to destroy myths surrounding sports, theoretical or hypothesis testing in sports research, and allowing the explanation and generalization of sport. In the past decade, sport and recreational policy makers have had to adjust globalization and neoliberal processes since they affect social, economic and state activities, including those of social and community development. The governments' methods to shift from support and financial provision for sport and other embedded liberalism provisions to modern neoliberal state ones resulted in significant changes Coalter (2007). In the “neo-liberal” state private-public partnerships, tax advantages for corporate social duty, and the reduction of social solidarity are key aspects of the new institutional frameworks. According to Thompson (2004), this implies that development and community level sport should operate under market conditions and frameworks inherent in neoliberalism and globalism. This means that sport should fulfil two roles: traditional sport development system for society and elite sport programs; as a function of legislation, programs, policies, funding and sport management, secondly, where sport is employed as a platform to deal with issues in the society and offer opportunities for disadvantaged members of the society. Research proves that one of the biggest challenges facing the disadvantaged is to find a community which they can identify with and belong under declining social program provision and persistent breakdown of social solidarity (Atherley, 2006). Long term reliability and sustainability in delivering social outcomes is essential to the success of these developments through sport participation programs. Modern society demands additional flexibility and choice. The challenge for the traditional sports sector in most places is to move beyond current sport delivery norms and provide a range of products at low cost locally developed opportunities and extended public, private and third sector social capital programs. According to Giddens (1997), there is always a risk relying on these predominantly volunteer organizations to determine social outcomes. In such as the United Kingdom, there is opportunity for the organizations to establish long term programs to support use of sport to engage the community to deliver positive social outcomes. Partnerships between the traditional sports organization and the community-based organizations could be forged to support participation in sports across the time from outreach to mainstream participation (Atherley, 2006). According to Tonts (2005) community is marked by familiar and cooperative ties between people that have a high degree of intimacy, moral commitment, and social cohesion. A sense of belonging to a community arises from a fundamental desire to create and maintain social relationships, to have a sense of belonging and develop a self-identity. The desire of an individual to belong and identify with a broader entity gets stronger in a world where everything else is changing. The identity formation process is fundamental to sport as well as of communities (Portes, & Landolt, 2000). According to Thomas (1995), community identity and community belonging is an abstract benefit of participation in sport. Sports give improved self-esteem, community identity and unity. Additionally, it facilitates community development and social inclusion. Coleman (1988) defines community development: Community development is the strengthening of social resources and processes in the community by developing the contacts, agreements, relationships, networks and activities outside the households that residents themselves identify will make their locality a much better place in which to live and work. Social Capital Coalter (2007) defines social capital as the anticipated collective or economic benefits deduced from preferential treatment and cooperation among individuals. Although there are different aspects to the term in different works, they seem to arrive at the fact that social networks have value. There is no doubt that sports are essential to social capital within a community. According to Mulholland (2008) defines social capital as the aggregate of potential or actual resources which link to possession of a durable network of institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition. Of the various elements within the community, sports are a way to build positive social capital (Giddens, 1997). Moreover, studies have shown that sporting activity at the grass root has the potential to motivate, inspire, and forge a community spirit in the face of social ills. Sport is an example of a good social control activity, which gives people a sense of purpose and identity, and keeps them distracted from antisocial activity. The research further indicates that sports provide a means of enhancing a sense of community identity, therefore, discouraging any antisocial behaviour. From the Delaney and Keaney (2005) research, social capital, social trust association membership and political participation in the United Kingdom have not declined over time. The UK slightly comes above the Europe average for levels of membership and participation in sports and average for volunteering in sport. Sport is the most popular type of group activity in the UK. Sports volunteering, though not as impressive in the UK, is nevertheless significant. Coleman (1988) suggests that the core of social capital to social inclusion agenda is exhibited in recent United Kingdom policy development. Some UK departments have produced reviews on tis nature of community bonding and social participation. These reviews show how sports play an important role in the two factors. The reviews reveal how sport contributes to supportive relationships, education, training and employment. Deprivation — disadvantage and social exclusion are terms used to describe a community that is suffering from acute social problems such as low socio-economic status, high population density, high chronic disease outbreak rates, and youth at the risk of exclusion from the society. This is where a social inclusion policy is important. The policy, particularly in the UK to an extent has driven the emphasis on sport activities as a potential panacea for social drawbacks, especially youth disengagement with crime (Bourdieu, 1991). Often, most clubs do not have a mandate to identify and engage with groups that are difficult to get to, since clubs are mostly run by volunteers and focus on delivering their sports. This is their primary purpose, which takes up most of their time. However, there are examples of clubs that use an outreach approach that work with local governments and organizations and provide access to sport. In the UK clubs such as the Gaelic Athletic Association in Northern Ireland Hastings Borough Council and Glasgow City Council, support the initiatives (Coalter, 2007). The associational nature in sport involvement, specifically sports clubs, is perceived as a medium for generation of social capital. Coalter (2007) also posits that sporting activities can be a way of cultivating new friendships and social associations across ethnic, religious, and class barriers. These, of course, include the playing and non-playing participants such as coaches, managers, board members, and volunteers. This eventually leads to growth in trust and reciprocity. In so doing, the communities get encouraged to co-exist in harmony. Sport can be advocated as an adhesive that holds communities together. Many scholars and sports persons suggest that sport can assist in enriching the community with high levels of social capital. This will result in them becoming resilient to negative outcomes due to cultural, social and economic changes. Data on sport participations show that sports have positively impacted in developing the society. Sport England is a good example of social sports clubs in the United Kingdom. It is the brand name for the English Sports Council and is a non-departmental body under the Culture, Media and Sport department. They deal with youth from diverse backgrounds. It main role is to build the foundations of a community’s sports system by working with national governing bodies as well as other funded partners. They intend to grow the number of people participating in sports, sustain participation levels. They also help people nurture their talent and reach to elite levels of sports as professionals. The organization has two statutory functions: protecting playing fields and as a lottery distributor for sport. Fundamental success factors in servicing the needs of the disadvantaged communities include engaging and retaining several partners that are able to support the delivery of programs and results through different, methods such as funding, expert advice, delivery and referrals (Rosenfield, Messner, & Baumer, 2001). They are within the scope of neoliberalism. Street League is an example of another program that started as a six-week voluntary project in 2001 to grow into a charity organization that has 80 different partners. Street League is an organized charity with programs and Glasgow (Tonts & Ahterley, 2005). Its mission is to support the ones excluded from the mainstream, particularly those over 16 years of age. It also helps the homeless, ex-offenders, long term unemployed, those with learning disability, refugees and asylum seekers, mentally challenged people, and drug and alcohol addicted people. They provide sports programs which include football, basketball and multi fitness sessions used to engage people in organized sport and a means for developing their skills in an enjoyable environment. Partners do not only provide financial support but also CSR activities such as volunteering to support program execution and provision office space (Barnes, 1998). The Lambeth and Southwark is another successful partnership. SAZ is a local area example working in London boroughs of North of Lambeth and Southwark. They particularly help people who are 45 years and older. It also helps disadvantaged people with disabilities, disadvantaged socioeconomic classes and ethnic minority groups. They focus on developing and enhancing existing partnerships, making new partnerships and figuring out new ways in which sports can be assets in being a catalyst to bring about social and economic well-being of the community. The SAZ does not run its own activities directly, rather, it works through partners and local groups to enhance existing provision. Similarly, Right to play is another international humanitarian sport for development organizations with operations in Canada and the United Kingdom which is successful in partnerships with international volunteers, local coaches, and organizations to deliver in disadvantaged areas of the world. They aim to create a healthier and safer world for children through the help of Sport and Play. They are considered to be athlete driven. A common trait identified in many of the community organizations is strong leadership at the local level. The success factor is exemplified by the committed and enthusiastic people with the vision and will lease to the development of groups such as LOCSP, Right to Play, Street League, Belfast Community Sports Network and Positive Futures. The creation of sport based social inclusion programs should not undermine the significance of sport development. Mass sporting events involve individuals in sport development and increase their enthusiasm by training for and participating in the events. The goal of these social groups is not to move participants from social sports events to sporting development, but to provide an opportunity to participate at all levels. The pathways or opportunities available may or not be taken by the participant (Clement, 1975). Trust is a fundamental element in social inclusion programs and in the development of social capital. One must be established in a familiar place before challenging cultural and physical boundaries (Singh, 2006). There are barriers that discourage the participation and engagement. These are cost of transport, access, and location of formal sports facilities. To ensure that willing participants do not need to find transport, the organizations provide access, community centre, local parks, which slowly allow people to participate. This process helps in building social capital as relationships develop. Over time, horizons expand and access to other programs, facilities, and services facilitated through the development of new social capital networks (Chalip, Thomas, & Voyle, 1996 and Kincheloe J. & Hayes K. 2006). Sports have led to many sports persons becoming professional players in different sporting activities. They have managed to become stars in different sports and managed to exploit their talents. Some of them are from humble backgrounds, but with the help of sports facilities, they succeeded. Such people are role models to young aspiring athletes (Chalip, 2006). As much as sports elevate the social status of the community, there are a few contradictory instances where sports do not obey the rule. Nowadays, there are cases of indiscipline in the sports industry which do not uphold moral standards. Instances such as the use of steroids have an advantage over the others. This is by no doubt cheating your way to the top. Sports are supposed to be part of an honourable event where we exploit our genuine talents. Cheating takes away the essence of sports. A good example is world champion Marion Jones who was disqualified for using steroids to race (Cairnduff, 2001). Sports clubs nowadays have become a business rather than institutions that develop talent. Big clubs that are a huge success have become more of advertising opportunities. This is making big money for them. This is how most clubs make money. For a team to remain at the top they hire already prominent players instead of concentrating on developing new talent (Cashman, 1995). In the future, the sports development organizations need to focus more effort to catch up with the current challenges facing them. First, programs should be designed with regard to local assets. These include revenue, infrastructures and networks. In the future, communities will have developed and so will the desire to be part of something. This will be a time when sports will be a major tool in the community development. Revenues will be higher than any other periods. This implies that there will be added opportunities for the participants (Coalter, 2007). There are future goals set for the sports developments. There will be increased support and funding to carry out studies on topics on disability sport and adapted physical activity in developing countries. They will focus on increasing participation levels, legislation improvement, and improve attitudes (Skinner, Zakus, & Edwards, 2005). There will be further studies on mental health and psychological well-being as one of the outcomes of participation of people with a disability. The organizations will increase accessibility and come up with universal designs in the environment and the structures of sports. In the future, organizations aim to manufacture coaching manuals and publish them in multiple languages and formats to make them accessible to many other countries (Cashman, 1995). Sports organizations will develop monitoring and evaluation tools to ensure quality sport programmes are implemented effectively while giving target outcomes. There will focus on exploration of qualitative research into disability sports participation in developing countries in order to determine the necessary efforts to improve social development efforts. The social development organizations will give more opportunity to share knowledge and experience. They will also make use of new technology and online communication to elevate collaboration between organizations, researchers and staff (Putnam, 2000 and Spies-Butcher, 2006). The organizations plan to vastly promote the United Nations Convention of Persons with Disabilities to policy makers in developing countries and negotiate for national policy developments with the aim of improving access to sporting opportunities for people with disabilities. This will go a long way in improving their mode of life. Conclusion Generally, the viability of sport-based social inclusion programs is subjected certain factors: policy and strategy, partnerships, community and social development, monitoring and evaluation and places and spaces. There are additional elements that contribute to methods of achieving the objectives which can be deduced. They include funding or resources, innovation, and time. The illustrations and examples provided in the essay indicate that sporting activity is important in building social capital, foster community development and building sustainability. However, there are still challenges faced that stand in the way. These are such as waste of human resources and being ideologically driven. The organizations should handle this in the future if they intend on alleviating the social situation. References Atherley, K. (2006). Sport, localism and social capital in rural Western Australia. Geographical Research, 44(4), 348-360. Shenton, F., (2001). Regenerating Neighbourhoods: A Critical Look at the role of Community Capacity Building. Local Economy, 16(4), 286-298. Barnes, S. (1998). Could sport and recreation opportunities be the glue which holds rural communities together. Paper presented at ISA XIV World Congress of Sociology, Montreal. July 26 - August 1. Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power. Cambridge, England: Polity Press. Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241 –253). New York: Greenwood Press Cairnduff, S. (2001). Sport and Recreation for Indigenous Youth in the Northern Territory. ASC: Canberra. Cashman, R. (1995). Paradise of Sport: The Rise of Organised Sport in Australia. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cassity, E. & Gow, G. (2005). Making up for Lost Time. The experience of Southern Sudanese young refugees in high schools. Youth Studies Australia, 24(3), 51-55. Chalip, L. (2006). Toward a distinctive sport management discipline. Journal of Spor Management, 20, 1-21. Chalip, L. Thomas, D. R., & Voyle, E. (1996). Enhancing well-being through sport & recreation. In D.R. Thomas & A. Veno (Eds). Community psychology & change: Australian & NZ perspectives (pp. 126-156). Palmerston Nth, NZ: Dunmore Press. Clement, W. (1975). The Canadian Corporate Elite: An Analysis of Economic Power. Toronto: McClelland & Stewart. Commonwealth of Australia. (2001). Stronger Regions: A Stronger Australia. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia. Commonwealth of Australia Sport 2000 Taskforce. (1999). Shaping Up: A review of Commonwealth Involvement in sport and recreation in sport in Australia. Paper No.1. Commonwealth of Australia: Canberra. Coalter, F. (2007). Sports clubs, social capital and social regeneration: Ill Defined Interventions with Hard to Follow Outcomes. Sport in Society, 10, 537-559. Coalter, F. & Allison, M. (1996). Sport and community development. Edinburgh: Scottish Sports Council. Coalter, F. Allison, M., & Taylor, J. (2000). The role of sport in regenerating deprived areas. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh Press. Coleman, J. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital, American Journal of Sociology, 94, 95-120 Collins, M. F., & Kay, T. (2003). Sport and Social Exclusion. London: Routledge. Costello, P. (2003). Building Social Capital. Retrieved November 11, 2005 from http://www.treasurer.gov.au/tsr/content/speeches/2003/008.asp?pf=1 Cowell, J. (2007). Sport and Social capital in Disadvantaged Communities. The Winston Churchill Memorial Trust of Australia. Portes, A. & Landolt, P. (2000). Social capital: Promise and pitfalls of its role in development, Journal of Latin American Studies, 32, 529-547 Productivity Commission. (2003). Social Capital: Reviewing the Concept and its Implications. Canberra: AusInfo. Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon & Schuster. Putnam, R. (1993). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Rosenfield, R., Messner, S., & Baumer, E. (2001). Social capital and homicide, Social Forces,80, 283-309. Singh, P. (2006), Urban Education, Cultural Diversity and Poverty. A Case Study of Globalization: Brisbane, Australia, Kincheloe J. & Hayes K. (2006), Metropedagogy: Power, Justice, and the Urban Classroom, (pp.133-146), Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers. Skinner, J., Zakus, D., & Edwards, A. (2008). Coming in From the Margins: Ethnicity, Community Support, and the Rebranding of Australian Soccer. Soccer and Society 9(3) 394-404 Skinner, J., Zakus, D., & Edwards, A. (2005). Football Communities: Research Report. Sydney: The Football Federation of Australia. Spies-Butcher, B. (2006). Understanding the concept of social capital: Neoliberalism, social theory or neoliberal social theory? Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Sydney. Third International Ministerial Conference on Physical Education and Sport in Punta del Este. (1999). Retrieved October 12, 2005 from http://www.unesco.org/education/educprog/mineps Thomas, D.N. (1995). Community development at work: A case of obscurity in accomplishment. London: CDF Publications. Tonts, M. (2005). Competitive sport and social capital in rural Australia. Journal of Rural Studies, 21, 137-149. Tonts, M. & Ahterley, K. (2005). Rural restructuring and the changing geography of competitive sport. Australian Geographer, 36( 2), 125-144. Delaney, L and Keaney, E. (2005). Sport and Social Capital in the United Kingdom: Statistical Evidence from National and International Survey Data. Department of Culture, Media and Sport. Read More