诚信治理:体育的新改革议程?

IF 2.5 3区 教育学 Q2 HOSPITALITY, LEISURE, SPORT & TOURISM International Review for the Sociology of Sport Pub Date : 2022-09-18 DOI:10.1177/10126902221125600
Michael P. Sam, C. Stenling, Minhyeok Tak
{"title":"诚信治理:体育的新改革议程?","authors":"Michael P. Sam, C. Stenling, Minhyeok Tak","doi":"10.1177/10126902221125600","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Globally, “integrity” has emerged as a critical concept for sport, with scholars, government agencies and NGOs proposing the establishment of “integrity systems”, comprising measures such as new policy units, ombudsmen and mediation services. The purpose of this study is to assess the coherence of this reform agenda, to determine its core features and gauge whether it constitutes a new governing paradigm and departure from “professionalisation”. Drawing on case material from Australia and New Zealand, we trace the sport integrity agenda and its adoption into each country's government policies and programmes. The emerging agenda focuses on diverse risks at the periphery of “old” professionalised management, while demanding a sector-wide response and universal adherence. Coordination and regulation are emphasised (at national, state/regional and local levels), supported by central government policy frameworks and grievance detection regimes. While the integrity agenda has distinctive elements of a reform movement, preliminary evidence suggests it may become integrated under the existing logics of performance, audits and risk management. It nevertheless signals substantive changes to the conduct of sport organisations at multiple levels of the system.","PeriodicalId":47968,"journal":{"name":"International Review for the Sociology of Sport","volume":"58 1","pages":"829 - 849"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Integrity governance: A new reform agenda for sport?\",\"authors\":\"Michael P. Sam, C. Stenling, Minhyeok Tak\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10126902221125600\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Globally, “integrity” has emerged as a critical concept for sport, with scholars, government agencies and NGOs proposing the establishment of “integrity systems”, comprising measures such as new policy units, ombudsmen and mediation services. The purpose of this study is to assess the coherence of this reform agenda, to determine its core features and gauge whether it constitutes a new governing paradigm and departure from “professionalisation”. Drawing on case material from Australia and New Zealand, we trace the sport integrity agenda and its adoption into each country's government policies and programmes. The emerging agenda focuses on diverse risks at the periphery of “old” professionalised management, while demanding a sector-wide response and universal adherence. Coordination and regulation are emphasised (at national, state/regional and local levels), supported by central government policy frameworks and grievance detection regimes. While the integrity agenda has distinctive elements of a reform movement, preliminary evidence suggests it may become integrated under the existing logics of performance, audits and risk management. It nevertheless signals substantive changes to the conduct of sport organisations at multiple levels of the system.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47968,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Review for the Sociology of Sport\",\"volume\":\"58 1\",\"pages\":\"829 - 849\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Review for the Sociology of Sport\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10126902221125600\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HOSPITALITY, LEISURE, SPORT & TOURISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review for the Sociology of Sport","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10126902221125600","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HOSPITALITY, LEISURE, SPORT & TOURISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在全球范围内,“诚信”已成为体育的一个重要概念,学者、政府机构和非政府组织建议建立“诚信系统”,包括新的政策单位、监察员和调解服务等措施。本研究的目的是评估这一改革议程的一致性,确定其核心特征,并衡量它是否构成了一种新的治理范式,是否偏离了“专业化”。根据澳大利亚和新西兰的案例材料,我们追溯了体育诚信议程及其在每个国家政府政策和计划中的采用情况。新议程侧重于“旧的”专业化管理外围的各种风险,同时要求全行业作出反应并普遍遵守。(在国家、州/地区和地方各级)强调协调和监管,并得到中央政府政策框架和申诉检测制度的支持。虽然廉正议程具有改革运动的独特元素,但初步证据表明,它可能在现有的业绩、审计和风险管理逻辑下得到整合。尽管如此,它标志着体育组织在系统多个层面的行为发生了实质性变化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Integrity governance: A new reform agenda for sport?
Globally, “integrity” has emerged as a critical concept for sport, with scholars, government agencies and NGOs proposing the establishment of “integrity systems”, comprising measures such as new policy units, ombudsmen and mediation services. The purpose of this study is to assess the coherence of this reform agenda, to determine its core features and gauge whether it constitutes a new governing paradigm and departure from “professionalisation”. Drawing on case material from Australia and New Zealand, we trace the sport integrity agenda and its adoption into each country's government policies and programmes. The emerging agenda focuses on diverse risks at the periphery of “old” professionalised management, while demanding a sector-wide response and universal adherence. Coordination and regulation are emphasised (at national, state/regional and local levels), supported by central government policy frameworks and grievance detection regimes. While the integrity agenda has distinctive elements of a reform movement, preliminary evidence suggests it may become integrated under the existing logics of performance, audits and risk management. It nevertheless signals substantive changes to the conduct of sport organisations at multiple levels of the system.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
13.00%
发文量
41
期刊介绍: The International Review for the Sociology of Sport is a peer reviewed academic journal that is indexed on ISI. Eight issues are now published each year. The main purpose of the IRSS is to disseminate research and scholarship on sport throughout the international academic community. The journal publishes research articles of varying lengths, from standard length research papers to shorter reports and commentary, as well as book and media reviews. The International Review for the Sociology of Sport is not restricted to any theoretical or methodological perspective and brings together contributions from anthropology, cultural studies, geography, gender studies, media studies, history, political economy, semiotics, sociology, as well as interdisciplinary research.
期刊最新文献
Unicorns, rainbows, and unicorn magic: Storying new knowledge of black masculinities within the WWE Young refugees’ experiences of accumulating horizontal and vertical social capital through organised and informal sports The Qatar World Cup and Twitter sentiment: Unraveling the interplay of soft power, public opinion, and media scrutiny Surviving child sexual abuse in women's artistic gymnastics: ‘It's beautiful, because had I stayed in the past, I wouldn’t have evolved as a person’ ‘For those few minutes you are free’: The meaning of sport from imprisoned men's perspective
×
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