Sports Mega-Events as Foreign Policy: Sport Diplomacy, “Soft Power,” and “Sportswashing”

IF 2.3 2区 文学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL American Behavioral Scientist Pub Date : 2024-07-23 DOI:10.1177/00027642241262042
Jonathan Grix, Paul Michael Brannagan
{"title":"Sports Mega-Events as Foreign Policy: Sport Diplomacy, “Soft Power,” and “Sportswashing”","authors":"Jonathan Grix, Paul Michael Brannagan","doi":"10.1177/00027642241262042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Sports mega-events (SMEs), such as the Olympic Games and the FIFA World Cup, have become a key part of state strategies to achieve a multitude of foreign policy goals. The literature attempting to explain this—often under the broad umbrella term of “sport diplomacy”—has recently been bolstered by the arrival of two very popular concepts in this area of research, “soft power” and “sportswashing,” leading to confusion and a general lack of consensus around the use of sport for non-sporting aims. This article makes two key contributions to the literature: first, it serves to clarify the conceptual relationship between sport diplomacy, soft power, and sportswashing. It does so by arguing that the latter two concepts are strategies at different stages of a similar process, that is, using sport to achieve specific foreign policy goals by states, state actors, and non-state actors. Our second contribution lies in the application of this conceptualization to two relevant, empirical cases of an advanced capitalist country (the United Kingdom) and an autocratic country (Qatar), both of which have hosted an SME. The results show that while a variety of states, state actors, politicians, and non-state actors use the same means (SMEs) to achieve different foreign policy goals, their geopolitics, different histories, regime types, economic systems, and levels of development influence their rationale for doing so and the strategies they choose.","PeriodicalId":48360,"journal":{"name":"American Behavioral Scientist","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Behavioral Scientist","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00027642241262042","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Sports mega-events (SMEs), such as the Olympic Games and the FIFA World Cup, have become a key part of state strategies to achieve a multitude of foreign policy goals. The literature attempting to explain this—often under the broad umbrella term of “sport diplomacy”—has recently been bolstered by the arrival of two very popular concepts in this area of research, “soft power” and “sportswashing,” leading to confusion and a general lack of consensus around the use of sport for non-sporting aims. This article makes two key contributions to the literature: first, it serves to clarify the conceptual relationship between sport diplomacy, soft power, and sportswashing. It does so by arguing that the latter two concepts are strategies at different stages of a similar process, that is, using sport to achieve specific foreign policy goals by states, state actors, and non-state actors. Our second contribution lies in the application of this conceptualization to two relevant, empirical cases of an advanced capitalist country (the United Kingdom) and an autocratic country (Qatar), both of which have hosted an SME. The results show that while a variety of states, state actors, politicians, and non-state actors use the same means (SMEs) to achieve different foreign policy goals, their geopolitics, different histories, regime types, economic systems, and levels of development influence their rationale for doing so and the strategies they choose.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
作为外交政策的体育盛事:体育外交、"软实力 "和 "体育洗礼"
体育盛事(SMEs),如奥运会和国际足联世界杯足球赛,已成为国家战略的重要组成部分,以实现多种外交政策目标。试图解释这一现象的文献--通常是在 "体育外交 "这一宽泛的总括术语下--最近因这一研究领域出现了两个非常流行的概念 "软实力 "和 "体育洗礼 "而得到了加强,导致人们对利用体育达到非体育目的产生了混淆,并普遍缺乏共识。本文对相关文献有两大贡献:首先,它有助于澄清体育外交、软实力和体育洗礼之间的概念关系。本文认为,后两个概念是一个相似过程的不同阶段的战略,即国家、国家行为者和非国家行为者利用体育来实现特定的外交政策目标。我们的第二个贡献在于将这一概念应用于两个相关的实证案例,一个是先进资本主义国家(英国),另一个是专制国家(卡塔尔),这两个国家都举办过中小型企业活动。研究结果表明,虽然不同的国家、国家行为体、政治家和非国家行为体使用相同的手段(中小型企业)来实现不同的外交政策目标,但它们的地缘政治、不同的历史、政权类型、经济体制和发展水平都会影响它们这样做的理由和它们选择的战略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
3.10%
发文量
190
期刊介绍: American Behavioral Scientist has been a valuable source of information for scholars, researchers, professionals, and students, providing in-depth perspectives on intriguing contemporary topics throughout the social and behavioral sciences. Each issue offers comprehensive analysis of a single topic, examining such important and diverse arenas as sociology, international and U.S. politics, behavioral sciences, communication and media, economics, education, ethnic and racial studies, terrorism, and public service. The journal"s interdisciplinary approach stimulates creativity and occasionally, controversy within the emerging frontiers of the social sciences, exploring the critical issues that affect our world and challenge our thinking.
期刊最新文献
Satellite Political Movements: How Grassroots Activists Bolster Trump and Bolsonaro in the United States and Brazil Reading the Tea Leaves: Question Wording and Public Support for the Tea Party Movement Articulations of StrongMen: A Knowledge Cultural Sociology of Recognizing Autocratic Practices in Russian, Turkish, and Global Regimes Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing: The Autocratic Subversion of Brazil’s Fourth Estate Transforming the Legacy of Colonial and Racialized Inequities in Childcare Systems in the United States: (Re)Framing Futures Through Black Feminist Thought
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1