The Paralympic Movement and the Olympics in Germany

The Paralympic Movement
and the Olympics in Germany
Gudrun DOLL-TEPPER, Prof.Dr.
（Free University Berlin / German Olympic Sports Confederation）

Introduction
In 2006, the “German Sports Confederation” （Deutscher Sportbund） and the“National Olympic Committee for Germany” （Nationales Olympisches Komitee für
Deutschland）merged, and the “German Olympic Sports Confederation”（Deutscher
Olympischer Sportbund/DOSB）became the umbrella sport organisation in Germany.
In this paper, the main goals of this merging process, some historical developments,
as well as current structures and issues will be discussed with a focus on therelations between the DOSB and disability sport organisations, in particular the“German Disability Sport Organisation”（Deutscher Behindertensportverband）,which
also serves as the “National Paralympic Committee Germany ” （Nationales
Paralympisches Komitee）.
Both organisations are working together in a variety of programmes and projects,
e.g. in the preparation of bids to host Olympic and Paralympic Games. “Inclusion” hasbecome a keyword for many initiatives in German sports, particularly regarding theimplementation of the “UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities”,
which entered into force in March 2009.

1. A look back: Sport developments in Germany after World War II
After World War II Germany was divided into the “Federal Republic of Germany”（FRG, West Germany） and the “German Democratic Republic” （GDR, East
Germany）.
As a consequence, this division existed also in the newly established sport
1

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.5

organisations（see Deutscher Sportbund 1990）: the “National Olympic Committee forGermany”（NOK für Deutschland）was founded in 1949 and the “NOC for the GDR”
followed in 1951. Both parts of Germany established an umbrella sport organisation:
the “German Sports Confederation”（Deutscher Sportbund）in 1950 in the FRG; andthe “German Gymnastics and Sport Federation”（Deutscher Turn- und Sportverband）
in 1957 in the GDR. Parallel structures existed in the FRG and in the GDR regarding
the Olympic sport movement and the general sport movement, in particular, focusing
on recreational and competitive sport activities.
A separate organisation for persons with disabilities was founded in 1951 in the
FRG named “The German Veterans Sport Organisation” （Deutscher VersehrtenSportverband）with a focus on wounded soldiers and war veterans. It changed its
name in 1975 to “The German Disability Sport Organisation” （Deutscher
Behindertensportverband）. A similar organisation was also founded in the GDR. A
detailed analysis of these historical developments was presented by WedemeyerKolwe（2011）. After the unification of Germany in 1990, reviewing the roots of thedisability sport movement from the beginning until then, both sport organisations for
persons with disabilities merged in 1991.
In the early years after World War II, these two sport organisations in the separate
parts of Germany focused mainly on sport as rehabilitation aiming at an improved
well-being of wounded war veterans. Amongst them were, however, former athletes,
who were also interested in competition, so controversial opinions existed, either
being in favour of the therapeutic and rehabilitative approach or preferring the sportcompetition approach （see Wedemeyer-Kolwe 2011）. In general, specificorganisational structures were developed, in some cases connected to the sportsystem of “able-bodied” persons, but in most cases as a separate sport organisation.
These historical developments are of crucial importance for the understanding ofcurrent structures and debates.
The history of the development of disability sport was strongly influenced and also
described in detail by Guttmann（1979）, a neurosurgeon, who worked at the Stoke
Mandeville Hospital in Aylesbury, England. Originally, Guttmann came from
Germany, but emigrated as a Jewish in 1939 from Germany under the rule of the
National Socialists to England.
In his well-known publication “Sport für Körperbehinderte”（original: “Textbook of2

The Paralympic Movement and the Olympics in Germany

Sport for the Disabled”） Guttmann （1979） describes the situation of soldiers andcivilians with a spinal cord injury. For centuries spinal cord injured persons wereseen as “hopeless cases” with a very short life expectancy of two or three years after
the injury. The Stoke-Mandeville-Concept introduced by Guttmann included physicalactivities and sport as part of a holistic rehabilitative process. His co-worker Scruton
described the early years at Stoke Mandeville Hospital as follows:“Step by step, under the enlightened leadership of Dr. Guttmann, the whole schemeof physical restoration of the paraplegic was systematically developed and put into
practice by us. And how often we were told what a waste of effort it all was”
（Scruton 1998, 13）.
On July 29, 1948, Guttmann organised the First Stoke Mandeville Games for 16 war
veterans. A few years later, in 1954, the first team of spinal cord injured German
athletes participated in the Games. The date chosen was a conscious decision, because
it was the day of the Opening Ceremony of the Olympic Games in London andGuttmann called this coincidence “a good omen”（Guttmann 1956, 78）.
The impact of Guttmann’s work was tremendous, in England, in Germany and inmany countries around the world, and led to the emergence of a global movement,
the Paralympic Movement（see Bailey 2008）:
On the occasion of the first International Stoke Mandeville Games（1st Paralympic
Games）outside England in 1960 in Rome, in a private audience, His Holiness PopeJohn XXIII said: “Dr. Guttmann, you are the de Coubertin of the Paralysed”（Scruton
1998, 310）.
Competitive sport for persons with disabilities developed during the following years
also in Germany, and athletes with different disabilities participated in championships
at national and international levels. However, the general public and the media had
little interest and it took quite long before disability sport events received more
attention in Germany and globally.

2. A new approach: Integration
In the 1970s, within the “German Sports Confederation”（Deutscher Sportbund）,
sport clubs started to integrate persons with disabilities into their programmes whichwere previously only open for persons without disabilities.
3

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.5

More and more sport clubs followed the examples of these “pioneers”, and a newterm was frequently used in this context, “Integrationssport”（see Mentz and Mentz
1982; Fediuk 1992; Scheid 1995）. Scientific studies were also carried out aiming at
identifying criteria for successful integration of persons with disabilities into physicaleducation in schools and physical activity, sport and games in the sport clubs. A
major issue dealt with attitudes of teachers and instructors towards integration（seeDoll-Tepper, Schmidt-Gotz, Lienert, Döen and Hecker 1994）.
Due to the fact that sport organisations and clubs for persons with disabilities wereseparate from other sport organisations, and the training of instructors and coaches
was based on a different qualification system, doubts were expressed that suchintegrative approaches could be successful.
Not only were sport clubs increasingly including persons with disabilities, but asimilar development occurred in schools, and new programmes for teacher, coach andinstructor education were introduced （see Fediuk 1999, Scheid 1995, Doll-Tepper
2002, Rheker 2002, Fediuk and Tiemann 2015）.
The process of integration progressed in Germany during the following two
decades, both in school and sport club settings（see Wegner, Scheid and Knoll 2015）.
Representatives of sport organisations and of governments responsible for sport
identified a need for better information and communication concerning sport
opportunities for persons with disabilities. In 1988 an information centre for disability
sport was established in Heidelberg which moved to Berlin in 1990, and since then it
provides information about sport programmes, events etc. as a national centre for
sport for persons with disabilities.
In the 1990s and early 2000s, sport organisations in Germany increasingly offeredprogrammes for persons with migration backgrounds and the term “integration” wasintroduced to describe these initiatives. Currently both terms “integration” and“inclusion” are being used in Germany, very often by making a distinction between
joint programmes for persons with and without disabilities which is called “inclusion”
and joint programmes for persons with a migrant background where the term
“integration” is preferred.

4

The Paralympic Movement and the Olympics in Germany

3. Paralympic Summer and Winter Games - Bid processes andthe relation to the Olympic Movement
German athletes participated in both Paralympic Summer and Winter Games. The
first Summer Paralympics were held in Rome, Italy, in 1960 and the first WinterParalympics were organised in Örnsköldsvik, Sweden in 1976. Between 1960 and
1988, athletes with disabilities in Germany trained in most cases separately from theother athletes in their own sport groups or disability sport clubs. Since the late 1980s
the concept of integration was introduced in some sport federations and some sport
clubs, and increasingly athletes were included in sport centres and Olympic training
centres. An important step in the process of greater acceptance of the Paralympics
within the world of Olympic sport was made when the city of Berlin, Germany, put
forward a bid to host the 2000 Olympic and Paralympic Games. In 1993, during thebid process, an international conference, called VISTA, was held in Jasper, Canada,
which addressed issues of high performance sport for athletes with disabilities（Steadward/Nelson & Wheeler 1994）. In a presentation, “Towards 2000 – theParalympics”, the following statement was made: “In its recent history, theParalympics have been associated to a greater extent with the Olympic Games: inSeoul, 1988, the same sport facilities were used for both the Olympic and theParalympic Games. In Barcelona, 1992, the Olympic Games and the Paralympic Games
were hosted by the same Organising Committee. And in 1993, for the first time inhistory, the cities bidding for the Olympic Games are discovering the Paralympics as
a valuable part of their bids”（Doll-Tepper/von Selzam 1994, 478）. The authors thenrefer to a statement which was made by the IOC President Juan Antonio Samaranchon the occasion of the Closing Ceremony of the First Paralympic Congress inBarcelona 1992 in his closing address: “… We will try, … to establish a condition,
recommending that the city that has the luck and the honour to be chosen for the
Games of the year 2000 will also be obliged to organise the Paralympics（in this casethe XI Games）a few weeks later”（Samaranch 1993, 712）. An interesting, sometimes
controversial debate took place at the VISTA conference and on many otheroccasions concerning the relations between the IOC and the IPC, in particular withregard to the bidding process and the hosting of the Games, but also beyond the5Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.5

event.
At that time three scenarios were presented:
It is interesting to note that other authors have addressed this relation more
recently with regard to the issue of inclusion. Legg, Fay, Wolff and Hums（2014）
discuss the future scenarios in their article “The International Olympic Committee –International Paralympic Committee Relationship: Past, Present and Future” andpresent five scenarios, reaching from maintaining the current status（status quo）to
dissolving IOC-IPC strategic agreements and ending all Olympic support for the
Paralympic Games after 2020.
In Germany, bids to host Olympic and Paralympic Games were prepared several
times, e.g. by the city of Berlin for the Games in 2000, the city of Leipzig for 2004, by
the city of Munich for 2018 and 2022 and most recently by the city of Hamburg for2024.
In 1972, Munich, Germany, hosted the Games of the XX Olympiad. However, noclose relation existed to the sport organisations for persons with disabilities at thattime.
In an article on the history of Paralympic Games, Labanowich（1989）reports: “Theintent ［sic］ had been to hold the Games in Munich but it turned out that theauthorities concerned planned on converting the Olympic Village into private

Doll-Tepper and von Selzam 1994, p.486

Figure 1. Three scenarios for the relationship between the IOC and IPC
6The Paralympic Movement and the Olympics in Germany

residences immediately following the Olympic Games. Without adequate housing
available, … the decision ［was made, the author］ to stage the competitions in
Heidelberg” （Labanowich 1989, 14）. Another interesting issue is addressed: “The
official title given to the competition was the XXI International Stoke MandevilleGames, Heidelberg, 1972. Yet the U.S. Army buses that transported the athletes fromtheir living quarters at the Rehabilitation Center to the competition sites had
Paralympics boldly displayed in the destination panel”（Labanowich 1989, 14）.
As regards the host cities of the Olympic and Paralympic Games, only in 1960 inRome, Italy and in 1964 in Tokyo, Japan, both Games were held in the same cities,
and it took until 1988 in Seoul, South Korea, that the host city was the same for bothGames.
Another important aspect was and still is the question, what kinds of disabilities
were included in the Paralympic Games （see Doll-Tepper 2013）. From the early
beginnings a growing number of athletes with different disabilities, such as spinal
cord injury, amputee, les autres, cerebral palsy, visual impairment and blindness
participated. However, persons with intellectual disabilities joined much later.

4. Sport for persons with an intellectual/learning disability
In Germany, persons with an intellectual disability can practice sport in an inclusive
sport club or setting, in a sport club for persons with disabilities, or they can join aprogramme of Special Olympics. In 1977 a sport club in Göttingen, Germany, opened
its doors to young people with an intellectual disability. The parents of a young boy,Andreas, and authors of a book entitled “It all started with Andreas”（Mit Andreas
fing alles an）（Mentz and Mentz 1982）describe the historical moment when theirson and other children with disabilities first joined the oldest sport club in Göttingen“Turngemeinde Göttingen von 1846” on 3 March 1977. This initiative had many
followers all over Germany and many sport clubs offered inclusive sport for persons
with different disabilities, and in particular, with intellectual disabilities.
Athletes with intellectual disabilities from Germany participated in previous
Paralympic Games, except during the period after the Sydney Paralympic Games
2000. At that time these athletes from INAS-FID were not allowed to participate until
the London 2012 Paralympic Games when these athletes re-entered the Games. A
7

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.5

larger community of athletes with intellectual disabilities is part of Special Olympics
Germany, with the opportunity to compete at local, national or even international
levels, in the Special Olympics World Games. The sports programme has been
extended in recent years, in particular, by introducing the “Unified Sports
Programme” in which athletes with and without intellectual disabilities compete
together in a team, e.g. in tennis, basketball, volleyball etc.
Special Olympics Germany is organising National Games bi-annually, very often in
conjunction with a congress which brings together experts from different disciplines
and persons with intellectual disabilities. In order to ensure that all participants canfollow the lectures, the presentations are given in two forms: in regular language andin “easy-to-understand” language（see Fachausschuss Wissenschaft Special Olympics
Deutschland e.V. 2014）.

5. Sport for all
The Sport for all movement has a long tradition in Germany and started withrecreational activities already in the 1960s. The term “Sport” is understood in the
broadest sense（Hartmann-Tews 1996）, which includes a variety of physical activities
and is not necessarily connected to competition. The so-called Trimm Campaign,
initiated by Jürgen Palm（Palm 1991）in Germany, was used as an “instrument forcommunicating the values and programmes of sport to the life quality enhancementof the general population” （Palm 1991, 68）. This concept was the basis for the
inclusion of various groups in society into sport and aimed at empowering people ofdifferent levels of performance, interests, abilities, cultural and religious backgrounds.

Figure 2. Mascot TRIMMY
8The Paralympic Movement and the Olympics in Germany

The idea and concept of “Sport for All” had an enormous impact on developments inGermany and in many other countries around the world and is still expanding. It isinteresting to note that the TRIMMY, the mascot of the Sport for All Movement, inthe early days, is now the mascot of the German Olympic Sports Confederation.

6. 2006 – A milestone year in German sport
In the late 1990s and early 2000s, discussions started about merging the “German
Sports Confederation”（Deutscher Sportbund）and the “National Olympic Committee
for Germany”（Nationales Olympisches Komitee für Deutschland）into one umbrellaorganisation.
On 26 May 2006, the German Sports Confederation and the National Olympic
Committee for Germany merged into the German Olympic Sports Confederation. Thiswas done at their joint wish and in order to strengthen organised sport in theFederal Republic of Germany.
Main goals of this merging process were:・Reduction of the number of committees;
・Clear separation of strategic and operational responsibilities;
・Strengthening professional approaches;
・Faster decisions;・Efficient forms of control;・Transparency/Code of ethics;
・Good governance;
・etc.

16
Regional Sports
Confederaons

62Naonal Olympic and
Non-Olympic Sports
Federaons

20
Federaons withparcular tasks

91 000 sports clubs
27 800 000 individual members

Figure 3. System of organised sport in Germany
9

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.5

High performance sport/Olympic sport plays an important role in the German
Olympic Sports Confederation. Sport development, however, is of equal importance. It
includes:・Sports facilities and environment;
・Health and fitness;
・School sports/physical education;
・Women and equal opportunities;
・Integration/inclusion through sports;
・Sports for the elderly;

Facts and Figures● 80.8 cizen in Germany● 91,000 sports clubs● 28 million members● 8.6 million volunteers working in sports clubs● of whom 740,000 hold management posions (e.g.
chairman/chairwoman)● 1 million volunteers working at an execuve level (e.g.
trainer, exercise instructors)• Approx. 90% of which is honorary• Approx. 50% of which have DOSB licences● 7 million voluntary assistants (e.g. for club events)
Source: Breuer, C. & Feiler, S. (2014). Sportvereine in Deutschland – ein Überblick. In C. Breuer (Hrsg.),
Sportentwicklungsbericht 2013/2014. Analyse zur Situaon der Sportvereine in Deutschland (S. 1216). Köln: Sportverlag Strauß

Image 1.

High Performance
Sport

CEO

Sports Development

Youth Sports• Olympic Support• Sport for All• Office of the CEO• Services• Talent Promoon• Sports Facilies• Media and Public• Youth Acvies• Administraon• Olympic Summer• Prevenon and• Internaonal Youth• Finances /Sports• Olympic WinterSports• Unit Olympic Games• Science

HealthManagement• Educaon / Olympic
Educaon• Equal OpportuniesRelaons• Polical

SportsCommunicaons
Berlin / Brussels• Internaonal Relaons

Management• Non-Olympic
Federaons

Figure 4. The Organisation of DOSB
10

Finances• OrganisaonControlling• Human Ressources• Legal Advice• MarkengThe Paralympic Movement and the Olympics in Germany

・Family and sports;
・Persons with disabilities;
・Persons with migrant backgrounds;
etc.
An important initiative in Germany is the “German Sports Badge” （Deutsches
Sportabzeichen）, which had started already in 1913.
The individual sportive ability is assessed within four sports and their main
disciplines:
・Athletics;
・Cycling;
・Swimming;
・Gymnastics;
With different performance requirements according to age, gender, and disabilityon three different levels: bronze, silver, and gold.
In 2015, the German Sports Badge Tour focussed on inclusion, which means thatparticipants with and without disabilities had the opportunity to get a badge in gold,
silver or bronze.

Image 2. German Sports Badge

11

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.5

Image 3. German Sports Badge Tour 2015

7. Relations between DOSB and DBS/NPC
The “German Disability Sport Organisation”（Deutscher Behindertensportverband）
serving also as the National Paralympic Committee Germany, is one of the 98 member
organisations of the “German Olympic Sports Confederation”（Deutscher Olympischer
Sportbund/DOSB）, and is part of the Non-Olympic Sports Federations. “The German
Deaf Sport Organisation”（Deutscher Gehörlosen-Sportverband）also belongs to thiscategory.
“Special Olympics Germany” is a separate organisation and is a member of the“Federations with particular tasks”（Verbände mit besonderen Aufgaben）.
Close cooperation between the DOSB and the DBS/NPC exists in various fields, e.g.
in recent years when preparing bids to host the Olympic and Paralympic Games.
Unfortunately, earlier bids failed and the bid for the 2022 Winter Games by Munich
and the bid for the 2024 Summer Games by Hamburg could not be continued due toa negative referendum by the voters.
The already mentioned German Sports Badge is another example of cooperation, as
well as numerous joint events on national and local levels. In German sport, there
exists a long tradition of organising “Olympic Youth Camps” during the Olympic
Summer and Winter Games.
Parallel to this initiative of the umbrella German sport organisation and their youth
sport organisation, the German Disability Sport Organisation in cooperation with their
12

The Paralympic Movement and the Olympics in Germany

youth sport organisation provides an opportunity for young persons with a disability
to participate in a “Paralympic Youth Camp” during the Paralympic Summer andWinter Games. In recent years, communication and cooperation has intensified, andyoung persons with a disability can also join the “Olympic Youth Camps”.
Close cooperation between these organisations is also practiced in the preparationof teaching material for primary and secondary schools prior to Olympic/Paralympic
Summer and Winter Games. The production of this material entitled “Olympia Calls:
Join in!” （“Olympia ruft: Mach mit!”） is coordinated under the leadership of theGerman Olympic Academy, and is made available to all schools in Germany and isvery much welcomed by teachers and their students alike.
The German Olympic Academy, as well as the German sport federations and the“German School Sport Foundation”（“Deutsche Schulsportstiftung”）, are organising
every year a sport competition both in summer and winter sports for schools. Thisinitiative started already in the context of the 1972 Olympic Games in Munich and isentitled “Youth trains for Olympics”（“Jugend trainiert für Olympia”）. A few years
ago this competition was extended to young people with disabilities and their contest
is called “Youth trains for Paralympics”（“Jugend trainiert für Paralympics”）. Both
final competitions at national level are jointly organised in the same venues, andinclude all participants at the opening and closing ceremonies.
Every year, on 23 June, in German sports the “Olympic Day” is organised, hosted
by the German Olympic Academy and the German Olympia & Sport Museum in
Cologne. This event brings together over 2,000 young people to practice sporting
activities, learn about the Olympic and Paralympic Movements and meet Olympic
and Paralympic champions.
On a regular basis, Olympic training centres are used by top athletes with andwithout disabilities. They all have access to services in sports medicine,
physiotherapy, exercise science, biomechanics etc.
Since the “UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” came into
force in 2009 in Germany many new initiatives were started to ensure that fullparticipation in sport for all persons with disabilities is realised.

13

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.5

8. Implementing the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities in Sport in Germany
In addition to working groups established by the ministers of education and theministers of sport in Germany, the German Olympic Sports Confederation has alsoestablished a working group entitled “Inclusion in and through sport”, chaired by theauthor of this article.
In a first step, a so-called “Position Paper” was jointly written by the
representatives of the respective sport organisations, and in early 2013 shared withall 98 member organisations within the DOSB. This paper aimed at clarifying what
the current state of sport for persons with disabilities was in Germany, and what kindof needs could be identified to ensure inclusion and equal participation.
At the same time, all sport organisations in Germany were asked to report on theircurrent situation as far as participation of persons with disabilities was concerned.
The reports were made available on websites and created increased interest within
the sport organisations.
The next step included financial assistance for sport organisations and sport clubs
which started an innovative programme of inclusion via a so-called innovation fund.
Again, all information of the programmes and their creative approaches were madeavailable so that an exchange of experiences was encouraged. During the year 2013,
many meetings of the DOSB working group were held in order to prepare a detailed“Position Paper” that was presented to the General Assembly of the DOSB in
December 2013.
This position statement was unanimously adopted by the General Assembly andserved as a basis for the preparation of an even more detailed plan in 2014, a“Strategic paper on inclusion in and through sport” for the period of 2015 – 2018. In
this paper, which was published by the working group in January 2015, five action
fields which are relevant for inclusion in sport were described:
・Programmes
・Structures
・Accessibility/Barrier-free Access・Qualification
14

The Paralympic Movement and the Olympics in Germany

・Cooperation（see DOSB 2015）
Connected to these action fields, other important areas were identified:・Lobbying,・Internal and external service,・supporting and advisory services,・public relations work,
・finances,・research.
For all these areas practical examples were given so that member organisations
could use these and develop their own programmes and approaches.
A very special document was produced by several experts and representatives ofGerman sport organisations entitled “Index for Inclusion in and through Sport”（“Index für Inklusion im und durch Sport”）, published by the “German Disability
Sport Organisation/National Paralympic Committee Germany” （Deutscher

Image 4. Verena Bentele
15

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.5

Behindertensportverband/NPC Germany）（2014）, which can be used as a guide topersons in sport clubs who wish to include individuals with different disabilities into
their sport programmes.
A special website “Inclusion in sport” provides updated information on
developments in this area to all interested individuals and groups.
Seminars and conferences with a special focus on inclusion were organised
annually, and in April 2016 a two-day congress entitled “Winning with Inclusion”（“Mit Inklusion gewinnen”）will bring together all persons interested in inclusion in
sport.
The congress will be held under the patronage of Verena Bentele, the current“Federal Government Commissioner for Matters Relating to Disabled Persons”（Beauftragte der Bundesregierung für die Belange behinderter Menschen）.
Verena Bentele is one of the most successful blind Paralympic athletes, who won
with her guide several gold medals in nordic skiing/biathlon, and she is a great
supporter of inclusion in sport in Germany. Recently, she has published her biography
entitled “Control is good, trust is better”（“Kontrolle ist gut, Vertrauen ist besser”）（Bentele 2014）.
In recent years, young athletes with disabilities were given access to elite sport
schools and a large number of athletes with disabilities currently use Olympic
training centres which exist all over Germany. An increasing number of coaches are
involved in disability sport and new initiatives exist with regard to talent
identification and development in Paralympic sport（see Radtke & Doll-Tepper 2014）.
Here are a few more examples with regard to the promotion of inclusion.
Wolfgang Weigert, one of the members of the DOSB working group, is the
President of the German Karate Federation, who hosted the 2014 Karate WorldChampionships in Bremen, Germany. On that occasion the first World Karate
Championships for Persons with Disabilities were included into this world event.
A poster campaign “Athletes on equal level” was started in 2015, showing athleteswith and without different disabilities in sport.
A stamp series “For the sport 2015” focussed on athletes with disabilities indifferent sports.

16

The Paralympic Movement and the Olympics in Germany

Image 5-8. Poster series on “inclusion in sport”

Images 9-11. Stamp series 201517

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.5

9. The Outlook
From a historical perspective, the Olympic/sport movement and the Paralympic/
disability sport movement had relatively limited connections in Germany. Both interms of structures and events, only a few links existed.
Over the last decades, enormous changes have occurred leading to a much closer
relation and numerous examples of cooperation.
Currently, the “German Olympic Sports Confederation” （Deutscher Olympischer
Sportbund） and the “German Disability Sport Organisation/National Paralympic
Committee Germany” （Deutscher Behindertensportverband/NPC Germany） work
together in various projects, programmes and initiatives, as described in this article.
A very special aspect should also be highlighted in this context: the establishmentof the Headquarters of the International Paralympic Committee （IPC） in Bonn,
Germany. During the 1990s, the German government, in particular the Federal
Ministry of the Interior, and the umbrella sport organisations, including the National
Olympic Committee for Germany and the German Disability Sport Organisation/
National Paralympic Committee Germany, were involved in the bidding. In 1999, theIPC moved into its current Headquarters in Bonn（see Bailey 2008）.The fact that the
IPC is based in Germany has given the Paralympic Movement a greater visibility（seeIPC 2009）and it can be anticipated that this will continue in the future.
Collaboration gained momentum in 2009 when the “UN Convention on the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities” came into force in Germany.
The strategic paper on “Inclusion in and through sport” of the DOSB and its 98
member organisations is currently being implemented with a focus on improved
accessibility and equal participation for persons with disabilities in all facets of sport.
The goal is to make sustainable progress as far as recreational activities and highperformance sport are concerned.
In current discussions it is not always clear what terminology should be used whenaddressing issues of joint participation, e.g. of persons with and without disabilities, aswell as persons with migrant backgrounds. Therefore several experts were asked by
the DOSB and the “German Sport Youth”（Deutsche Sportjugend/dsj）to provide
detailed information about the use of the terms, such as “integration”, “inclusion”,
18The Paralympic Movement and the Olympics in Germany“intercultural learning” and “diversity” and to share explanations about the meaning
and theoretical concepts connected to these terms. This expertise has recently been
published and serves as an important basis for further discussions（see Gieß-Stüber/Burrmann/Radtke/Rulofs & Tiemann 2014）.
Despite many successes in providing participation opportunities as spectators andathletes, more efforts are needed in making sure that persons with disabilities cantake up positions as coaches, referees, umpires and leaders, e.g. of sport organisations
and sport clubs.
A controversial issue being discussed in Germany as well as globally, is theparticipation of athletes with a disability who practice sport using a prosthesis.
Similar to the situation of South African sprinter Oscar Pistorius （see Pistorius
2009）, the German athlete Markus Rehm has reached the highest levels of
performance in his sport discipline, the long jump, and became German champion inlong jump amongst athletes without disabilities. However, despite this outstanding
result, he was not nominated to take part in the European Championships after
winning the German Championship. The controversial debate is based on thequestion of whether he has an advantage using a prosthetic leg compared to theother competitors, which could be interpreted as unfair. This issue is not only of
relevance for German sports, but also internationally, where the International
Association of Athletics Federation（IAAF）has recently made decisions concerning
the eligibility of athletes with prostheses.
In Germany, negotiations have begun to bring together more sport events for “ablebodied” athletes and athletes with disabilities; past experiences have shown that this
could be a successful way forward towards inclusion.
The fact that the German Olympic Sport Confederation has approved a position
statement on inclusion and is implementing a strategic plan, which is relevant for all
Olympic, non-Olympic and three sport organisations for persons with disabilities（German Disability Sport Organisation/NPC Germany）, Special Olympics Germany
and the German Deaf Sport Organisation, as well as other member organisations, isan indication of the importance given to these developments in the sport movementin Germany.
Developments with regard to the Olympic and the Paralympic Movement areclosely connected to the strategic decisions of the IOC, especially the Olympic
19

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.5

Agenda 2020, the implementation of the IPC’s strategic plan 2015-2018, and new
directions taken by the International Sport Federations （IFs）. They have anenormous impact on developments on the national level, e.g. in Germany. However,developments on the national level will also influence strategies of international sport
governing bodies.

References
Bailey, S. 2008. Athlete First – A History of the Paralympic Movement. Chichester: Wiley.
Bentele, V. 2014. Kontrolle ist gut, Vertrauen ist besser. München: Kailash Verlag.
Breuer, C. and Feiler, S. 2015. Sportvereine in Deutschland – ein Überblick. In C. Breuer（Hrsg.）,
Sportentwicklungsbericht 2013/2014. Analyse zur Situation der Sportvereine in
Deutschland. Köln: Strauß, pp.12-18.
Deutscher Behindertensportverband/National Paralympic Committee Germany （Hrsg.） 2014.
Index für Inklusion im und durch Sport. Ein Wegweiser zur Förderung der Vielfalt imorganisierten Sport in Deutschland. Frechen: Selbstverlag.
Deutscher Sportbund（Hrsg.）1990. Die Gründerjahre des Deutschen Sportbundes, Wege aus derNot zur Einheit. Schorndorf: Hofmann.
Doll-Tepper, G. and von Selzam, H. 1994. “Towards 2000 – The Paralympics.” in R. Steadward, E.
Nelson and G. Wheeler（Eds.）, The Outlook. Edmonton: Rick Hansen Centre, pp.478-487.
Doll-Tepper, G. 2002. Integrativer Behindertensport – Entwicklungen und Perspektiven. in H.
Ohlert and J. Beckmann（Hrsg.）, Sport ohne Barrieren. Schorndorf: Hofmann, pp.15-26.
Doll-Tepper, G. 2013. Paralympics – wohin entwickeln sich die Spiele von Mandeville? in E.
Emrich, M.-P. Büch and W. Pitsch（Hrsg.）, Olympische Spiele – noch zeitgemäß? Saarbrücken:
Universitätsverlag des Saarlandes, pp.193-202.
Doll-Tepper, G., Schmidt-Gotz, E., Lienert, C., Döen, U. and Hecker, R. 1994. Einstellungen vonSportlehrkräften zur Integration von Menschen mit Behinderungen in Schule und Verein.
Köln: Sport und Buch Strauß.
DOSB（Hrsg.）2015. Strategiekonzept Inklusion im und durch Sport. Frankfurt, M.: DOSB.
Fachausschuss Wissenschaft Special Olympics Deutschland e.V. （Hrsg.） 2014. Inklusion in
Bewegung: Menschen mit und ohne Behinderung gemeinsam im Sport. Berlin: SportThieme.
Fediuk, F. and Tiemann, H. 2015. Integration und Inklusion. In M. Wegner, V. Scheid and M.
Knoll（Hrsg.）, Handbuch Behinderung und Sport. Schorndorf: Hofmann, pp.332-340.
Fediuk, F. 1992. Einführung in den Integrationssport I. Pädagogik-konzeptionelle Grundlagen.
Kassel: Gesamthochschule Kassel Universität.
Fediuk, F. 1999. Integrativer Schulsport. Kassel: Gesamthochschule Kassel Universität.
Gieß-Stüber, P., Burrmann, U., Radtke, S., Rulofs, B. and Tiemann, H., DOSB/dsj（Hrsg.）2014.
Diversität, Inklusion, Integration und Interkulturalität – Leitbegriffe der Politik,
sportwissenschaftliche Diskurse und Empfehlung für den DOSB und die dsj; Expertise.
Frankfurt am Main: Frotscher Druck.
Guttmann, L. 1979. Sport für Körperbehinderte. München – Wien – Baltimore: Urban &Schwarzenberg.
20

The Paralympic Movement and the Olympics in Germany
Hartmann-Tews, I. 1996. Sport für alle!? Schorndorf: Verlag Karl Hofmann.
International Paralympic Committee 2009. The International Paralympic Committee – 20 Years
in Pictures. Bonn: IPC.
Labanowich, S. 1989. The Paralympic Games: A Retrospective View. Palaestra Vol.5（4）, pp.9-14;
pp.48-52.
Legg, D., Fay, T., Wolff, E. and Hums, M. 2014. The International Olympic Committee –International Paralympic Committee Relationship: Past, Present, and Future. Journal ofSport and Social Issues, pp.1-25.
Mentz, G. and S. 1982. Mit Andreas fing alles an. Göttingen: Buch- und Offsetdruckerei Martin
Sass & Co.
Palm, J. 1991. Sport for All – Approaches from Utopia to Reality. Schorndorf: Verlag Karl
Hofmann.
Pistorius, O. 2009. Blade Runner. London: Virgin Books.
Radtke, S. and Doll-Tepper, G. 2014. Nachwuchsgewinnung und -förderung im paralympischen
Sport. Köln: Sportverlag Strauß.
Rheker U. 2002. Integrationssport, Sport ohne Aussonderung – Pädagogische Konzeption füreinen „Sport für alle“. In H. Ohlert and J. Beckmann （Hrsg.）, Sport ohne Barrieren.
Schorndorf: Hofmann, pp.47-81.
Samaranch, J.A. 1993. Closing address. In Once （Ed.）, I Paralympic Congress Barcelona ’92.
Barcelona: SUPORT SERVEIS S.A., p.712.
Scheid, V. 1995. Chance der Integration durch Sport. Aachen: Meyer & Meyer.
Scruton, J. 1998. Stoke Mandeville – Road to the Paralympics. Brill, Aylesbury: The Peterhouse
Press.
Steadward, R., Nelson, E. and Wheeler, G. （Eds.） 1994. The outlook. Edmonton: Rick Hansen
Centre.
Wedemeyer-Kolwe, B. 2011. Vom „Versehrtenturnen“ zum Deutschen Behindertensportverband(DBS)– eine Geschichte des deutschen Behindertensports. Kempten: Arete.
Wegner, M., Scheid, V. and Knoll, M. （Hrsg.） 2015. Handbuch Behinderung und Sport.
Schorndorf: Hofmann.

21

パラリンピック研究会

紀要 vol.5

ドイツにおけるパラリンピック・ムーブメントとオリンピックグドルン・ドルテッパー（ベルリン自由大学／ドイツ・オリンピックスポーツ連盟）

2006年，「ドイツスポーツ連盟」（Deutscher Sportbund）と「ドイツ・オリンピック
委員会」（Nationales Olympisches Komitee für Deutschland）が合併してドイツ・オリ
ンピックスポーツ連盟（Deutscher Olympischer Sportbund/DOSB）が創設され，ドイツのスポーツ統括組織となった。本稿では，合併の主な目的ならびに現在の目標と組織体制について，DOSB と障害者スポーツ団体，とりわけドイツ・パラリンピック委員
会 と し て の 機 能 も 果 た す「 ド イ ツ 障 害 者 ス ポ ー ツ 連 盟 」（Deutscher
Behindertensportverband）との関係を中心に論じる。
両組織は，例えば，オリンピック・パラリンピック大会のミュンヘン（2018年／2022年）およびハンブルク（2024年）への招致の準備をはじめ，さまざまなプログラムやプ
ロジェクトに協力して取り組んでいる。ドイツでは，「障害者の権利に関する条約」に基づく取り組みをはじめとして，「インクルージョン」（包摂）がスポーツにおける数々の取り組みのキーワードになっている。DOSB の加盟組織全98団体の協力の下，重要な文書が作成され運用されている。
「スポーツにおけるインクルージョン」については，「インフォメーションペーパー」，「ポジションペーパー」が作成され，これらを経て現在は「2015-2018年戦略ペーパー」が運用されている。これら文書の概要を本稿で簡単に紹介する。
「ドイツ・スポーツバッジ」と呼ばれるスポーツ競技大会の仕組みも，両組織間の協力の一例である。年齢，ジェンダーおよび障害の有無を問わず，すべての人々が参加できる形での改変を経て，「スポーツバッジ・ツアー2015」はインクルージョンをテーマに掲げて実施された。他にも，オリンピックデー（６月23日），選手権大会，ユース競技大会，オリンピック・パラリンピック・ユースキャンプなど，障害者と健常者がともに参加するスポーツイベントが数多く実施されている。
本稿では，ドイツのスポーツにおける機会の平等とインクルージョンに向けた次のス
テップについても概観する。
22